Both your postings are too close to home, but that perhaps is a consequence
of the same slippery slope upon which we have placed ourselves. There seems
to be support for both separability and inseparability -- it's a matter of
kind -- a person, as a material and biological entity, embodies the traces
of past activity, and is materially separable from the physical and social
conditions that constitute one context to the next. And in a way, those
unique trajectories make a facade of separability, as each person we
encounter is distinctive -- the trace of the trajectory of each person is
unique in part because each person is physically separable from prior
contexts, and brings a singular historical conditioning to bear at any
moment. But temporaly, as each person enacts the convolution (1) of pasts,
the identity of that person is inseparable from their historical
co-constitution of contexts with other people and things. Those other people
having enacted the convolution of their pasts, and other things having been
made by yet others of other convoluted pasts.
(1) By this term i am inspired by the mathematical process, which involves
simultaneous integration and transformation. But its also a bit of a pun for
the material signs of brain development.
Apologies to the 1000 authors whom i have just plaigiarized.
bb
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 27 2002 - 08:02:49 PDT