Andy wrote in response to me:
>if it IS possible to separate "will" from "that side
>[of consciousness] wh. accommodates itself to the ideal object"?', and of
>course it isn't, but that's exactly what abstraction is about.
AND
>The way I understand it is that once human society has
>developed a way of splitting our intellectual activity away from our wilful
>activity and positing these as the proper activities of two different
>social groupings, and solving the problem of re-coordinating this humanness
>which has been split into two, then we have the basis for internalising
>this dichotomy in the form of concepts of intellect and will.
That's helpful, Andy, but I still wonder if society ever succeeded in
separating intellectual activity (I take it this is the activity of the
bourgeoisie?) from willful activity (supposedly the working class? --
manual labor??). The premise that the ideal (the only truly objective and
not merely abstract thought) is based on a division of manual from
abstract/intellectual labor seems to lead to the conclusion that there is
no longer an ideal in this sense.
What do others think?
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 01 2000 - 01:00:46 PDT