At 20:46 12/02/02 -0800, you wrote:
>Of course I would make the same statment Eric. A gun in a pile of salt
>undergoes changes but these changes do not constitute history in any
>sense of the word.
>
>Oxidation is not history.
>
Of course, it's true that humans are the only species 'for whom history
exists', as Paul puts it. But that does not mean that other things do not
have a history. I do not accept that it is only meaningful to use the term
'history' in relation to human activity undertaken 'for itself' (by which I
assume you mean with some degree of consciousness). A mountain has a
geological history just as a kidney has a history of evolution as a
physical organ. Their existence is just as much 'prima facie historical
existence.' I'm reminded of Marx's remark that the great advance Darwin
made was to introduce history into nature.
I have always one of the aspects of the H in CHAT to be that mediating
artefacts themselves have a history that plays an important role in the
range of possibilities open to humans at any point in time.This notion is I
think fundamental to historical materialism with its concept that the
development of the productive forces provides the bedrock for the
development of human society.
Bruce Robinson
>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: <mailto:MnFamilyMan@aol.com>MnFamilyMan@aol.com
>>To: <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>>Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 6:30 PM
>>Subject: Re: History
>>
>>In a message dated 2/12/2002 3:57:30 PM Central Standard Time,
>><mailto:illonph@pacbell.net>illonph@pacbell.net writes:
>>
>>
>>>A gun, a mountain, a kidney, as far as I know, do not have a
>>>history for themself.
>>
>>
>>Leave agun ina pile of salt as it rains and make the same statement.
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.319 / Virus Database: 178 - Release Date: 28/01/02
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 01 2002 - 01:00:20 PST