Yes, your right. The very end of the book. You may now proceed to level 2.
(kidding of course)
The quote by Mikhailov had a nice ring to it for me. I would like to,
although I'm sure there would be resistence - to somehow situate it with
Ilyenkov's ideal. It seems to me "delimiting" the ideal to logical forms
may just be to limiting. Davydov development of Ilyenkov who he sees as
very important to the development of AT does not seem to delimit it to such
an extent. The ideal being this formation object-action-word-action-object
seems a little broader than how its been currently interpreted.
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul H.Dillon [mailto:illonph@pacbell.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 10:36 PM
To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
Subject: Re:
Nate,
That passage sounded incredibly like something from Mikhailov's "Riddle of
the Self" but I couldn't locate it quickly. Where did you draw it from or
is it your own statement?
Paul H. Dillon
----- Original Message -----
From: Nate Schmolze <nate_schmolze@yahoo.com>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 5:27 PM
> " Now even in the most complex actions I am able to be my own critic
mainly
> because the sum total of historically completed actions lives in me,
> objectively unfolded in the language of my people. Besides my friends and
> tutors, my teachers and professors, I have constant interlocutors, critics
> and helpers in those who throughout the centuries posed and solved the
most
> serious and difficult riddles of existence, who in themselves, in their
> works personally experienced the problems of their time and argued with
the
> time, and with me, a representative of another culture that is still the
> same, continuing culture of humankind. And I together with them, in
> disputation with them, take part (even if I discover only for myself) in
the
> discovery of great ideas, ideals and evaluations. In myself I relive anew
> the clash of the notions of good and evil, beauty and happiness, truth and
> aim. They are born again in me and perhaps in some way they are new....
And
> now I myself on the basis of my own experience, assessing my own actions,
> know that thinking is not description, not the reproduction of that which
is
> given in the imagination, of that what I find in the spatial field of
> experience. Thinking is my movement, the movement of my knowledge in time.
> And this movement in time is possible because the different voices of
> different times, peoples, epochs and cultures constantly come to life in
my
> life. Teaching someone to think does, in fact, mean involving him in
active,
> objective intercourse, bringing human history into his life, teaching him
to
> feel, rejoice and suffer, to protest and admire, to know and thus to carry
> in himself a whole world in all its integrity as the known, conscious
world
> of our life. This is the only way to awaken the doer and the critic, the
> craftsman and the artist in a person. So now my different Selves live even
> in my dreams, arguing with each other, assuming the shape of other people
> including people that have never existed in this world. They argue,
imagine,
> act and even solve problems with which I and they wrestled during my
waking
> hours. But sometimes, just because in a dream they are not restrained by
the
> clear knowledge "That can't happen" , they are able to find something that
> really never did happen but that today I simply cannot do without" .
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 01 2000 - 01:00:53 PDT