In a message dated 10/24/2001 4:02:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
mcole@weber.ucsd.edu writes:
> A word we are using differently, Eric, is phylogeny. I take it to mean,
> roughly, the history of our species. I think the time scale you are
> referring to I would call cultural-history, but I am not sure.
>
Any word is a theory. To name an object is to apply a concept to it.
Admittedly,
by means of the word we wish to comprehend the object. But each name, each
application of the word, this embryo of science, is a critique of the word, a
blurring
of its form, an extension of its meaning. Linguists have clearly enough
demonstrated
how words change from being used. After all, language otherwise would never be
renewed, words would not die, be born, or become obsolete.
The above quote is from page 251 of Vygotsky's crisis. I paste it here
because I believe it speaks to how you view my use of phylogeny as being
incorrect. Yes, phylogeny is the term used for explaining the evolution of
the Human species but I believe it can also be used to explain how day to day
interactions evolve, combine with the ontogenesis of each person present and
then move forward into a joint development between the individuals and the
group. To use the word cultural history is to place to much with on past
events and artifacts and not emphasize the evolution contained within the
moment.
My understanding of phylogenesis is that it is not stagnant and tied to any
moment in time but evolves as the human species evolves. This evolution
happens within all of us and is not unique to any level of interaction.
Phylogenesis exists when people disagree, agree, or just plain exist.
Cultural history is tied more to the rigid artifacts contained within
specific cultures. Phylogenesis is a concept that encompasses all
individuals who are members of a particular phylum. For example the day to
day interactions of some computer geeks in the 1970's resulted in the current
medium we are currently using to communicate. Granted those geeks probably
had their own unique culture but the starting place of their evolution of the
computer began at the same starting point as all other people alive in the
the 1970's but because of their ingenuity and great activity they were able
to evolve the computer beyond what others were capable of and as a result the
phylogenesis of the human species now includes that which was started by
those pioneers.
Therefore Mike, I do not take phylogenesis to mean the history of our species
but the active evolution of our daily activities.
It also should be noted that phylogenesis cannot be properly discussed unless
ontogenesis is addressed as well. Members of a group may join with the
phylogenesis of that group or they may become oppositional to that
phylogensis, certainly a situation that occurs on a daily basis within all of
our working groups.
Eric
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 01 2001 - 01:02:04 PST