Hi Andy
No, I haven't read Luria's comments on romantic science. I recently
read Mike's epilogue in the book on Luria recently archived at
XMCA. Luria's specific thoughts on romantic science I would like to read.
As well as reading the book on Schlegel and German Romanticism I have
been re-reading Veresov's introductory chapter in "Vygotsky Before
Vygotsky". The central themes of consciousness, monism, and
objectivty, and Vygotsky's multiple developing perspectives on the
relation BETWEEN these 3 concepts. Consciousness interpreted not from
a single unified system but rather multiple perspectives or "systems
of analysis". Verosov seems to be asking, what was considered
"foundational" within Vygotsky's search for explaining consciousness.
As I read Verosov's answer the "system of relations" which included
the concepts consciousness, monism, and objectivity was interpreted
differently at different periods in Vygotsky's life. The relations
between these 3 concepts [the various systems] was answered in
multiple or plural relational configurations which
historically modified what Vygotsky included in his search for
the "objective analysis of mind" at each historical moment.
My reading of Veresov suggests that Vygotsky's final version or
system, which is his cultural historical model was asking the same
"questions" about the possible relations between the 3 concepts but
Vygotsky's final answer after 1932 was radically tranformed from his
earlier answers to the same question.
Verosov also suggests that Activity theory emerged from cultural
historical in the 1930's as one POSSIBLE branching of cultural
historical theory as a particular system or CHAT but that other
branches which focus more on "meaning" and "sense" are also possible
approaches. This seems to open up a space for alternative answers or
a plurality of responses to the relation between the 3 concepts.
Schlegel as a Romantic, writing in 1800, had this to say in response
to Fichte.
"Our philosophy does not begin like the others with a first principle
- where the first proposition is like the center of the first ring of
a comet - with the rest a long tail of mist - we depart from a small
but living seed - our center lies in the middle"
Schlegel's perspective commits him to something like "life" as the
framework for understanding reality. Schlegel's philosophical method
is genetic or synthetic as opposed to deductive or syllogistic and
underscores the historical dimension to his approach. The focus is on
coming into being and to understanding the development or genesis of
an idea. To understand how a thing comes into being, we do well to
look at its various phases of development or its history. Schlegel's
commitment is to starting in the middle, in the midst of the dynamic
flow itself. Schlegel saw the various philosophical systems that
comprise the history of philosophy as links in a coherent chain, with
the understanding of any given philosophical system requiring
understanding of the chains to which it is connected.
In the 1800's these ideas were ridiculed by the grand system builders
of German Idealism and dimissed as "merely" aesthetic or romantic.
Today I get the sense that many would continue to dismiss Schlegel as
merely romantic but within the sociocultural turn in psychology there
are frameworks that would share Schlegel's sense-ability. In
particular the hermeneutical framework.
Larry
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
<mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
Larry,
Have you read Luria's comments on Romanic Science?
Andy
Nektarios Alexi wrote:
Sounds like it:)
-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
<mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu> on behalf of mike Cole
Sent: Sun 11/20/2011 1:21 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] Ambivalence and system
Romantic science, Larry?
:-)
Mike
On Nov 19, 2011, at 12:37 PM, Larry Purss
<lpscholar2@gmail.com <mailto:lpscholar2@gmail.com>> wrote:
I wanted to reflect a little more on the centrality of
ambivalence as
inherent in all systemic conceptual worldviews by a
backward glance to the
tension between early German Romanticism and German Idealism.
This is not an arena I know well but Andy's writings have
clled me tlearn
more.
I am reading a book on Schlegel's contribution to the
ideas circulating in
Jena at the beginning of the 1800's. A time which has been
referred to as
Early German Romanticism.
Schlegel wrote this comment when reflecting on thinking
systematically.
"It is equally fatal for the spirit to have a system and
to have none. It
will simply have to decide to combine the two"
This comment seems to share the same sensibility as
Zygmunt Bauman's notion
of "ambivalence" as ontological to all system
constructions. "liquid
modernity" as diachronic versus more structural notions of
solid modernity
is a case in point.
Every philosopher must have a system, for to make claims
and construct
arguments, we must assume some system, FOR WE NEED LIMITS,
but this must be
done with the recognition that ANY particular system is a
PART of a
PLURALITY of other systems. This is the recognition that
one must
simultaneouslly be WITHIN a system and be without it.
This way of thinking, which can be framed as "romantic"
[no final system]
is also hermeneutic.
Just further reflections on the ontological necessity of
ambivalence at the
heart of our projects.
Larry
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1
Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
<http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca