Just a note from The North
consciousness in Swedish is MED-VETANDE (knowing together WITH) i.e.
impossible for one - possible for two (Feuerbach in T&L)
Leif
2007-02-12 kl. 06.09 skrev Mike Cole:
> co-co-co-coriko-cu!
> mike
>
> On 2/11/07, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>>
>> But "recognition" (in the relevant usages) comes from "cognate" -
>> co-born,
>> i.e., of the same kin.
>> Andy
>> At 10:32 PM 11/02/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>> >Did you know that the root word both for the English KNOWLEDGE and
>> Slavic
>> >"ZNANYE", Latin "GNOSIS" is the same Sanskrit "jna"? (remark
>> >CO-GNITION!!= SO-ZNANYE)
>> >Here is an interesting etymological view:
>> >http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=know&searchmode=none
>> ><http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=know&searchmode=none>
>> >Ana
>> >
>> >Mike Cole wrote:
>> >>OK, here is the message on this topic. It has not appeared on the
>> archive
>> >>where I looked for it. I
>> >>am trying to figure out why. Thanks to Ed Wall for pointing me to
>> it.
>> >>
>> >>There is a cluster of messages from David, Vera, Ana and Martin and
>> ??
>> here
>> >>that seems to me
>> >>especially important and potentially generative.
>> >>
>> >>Referring to the note I sent earlier with the analysis of the
>> Russian
>> who
>> >>also knew Sanskrit, I questioned
>> >>the issue of so- as a prefix in Russian. ditto o-
>> >>
>> >>And when we combine the two prefixes ( so-znanie/ o-so-znanie) what
>> is
>> being
>> >>created. Peter? MGU Aspiranti?
>> >>Anna S? ???
>> >>
>> >>znanie =knowledge
>> >>so-znanie ~ co knowledge ????
>> >>o-so-znanie ~~ about-co-knowledge, concerning-co-knowledge???????
>> >>
>> >>mike
>> >>
>> >>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >>From: Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu>
>> >>Date: Feb 9, 2007 6:36 PM
>> >>Subject: Re: [xmca] Harried instructor seeks words of wisdom
>> >>To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>> >>
>> >>Vera,
>> >>
>> >>I would certainly be interested in hearing more about the
>> distinctions
>> >>you're making between responsiveness, awareness and consciousness.
>> >>
>> >>To add to the (my) confusion, digging through my notes I've come
>> across
>> the
>> >>following note by translator Norris Minick in Thinking & Speech (p.
>> 388,
>> n.
>> >>12):
>> >>
>> >>"By the phrase 'conscious awareness' we gloss the Russian osaznanie,
>> which V
>> >>carefully and consistently uses and distinguishes from the term
>> soznanie
>> or
>> >>'consciousness.' Vygotsky clarifies the difference between the two
>> at
>> >>several points in the text
the earlier translation of this volume
>> (
Thought
>> >>and language
) rendered both terms as 'consciousness,' introducing a
>> >>confusion not to be found in the original Russian text."
>> >>
>> >>The links to neuroscience are very interesting. If I understand it
>> >>correctly, Vygotsky's psychology was the study of consciousness and
>> >>physiology (the material basis of consciousness). The division of
>> labor
>> that
>> >>developed between Vygotsky and Luria speaks to this, I think. Modern
>> >>neuroscience too often wants to treat consciousness as an
>> epiphenomenon,
>> but
>> >>Vygotsky clearly viewed it as having a purpose: it has evolved
>> because
>> it
>> >>serves an important function. After my last message I recalled
>> Vygotsky's
>> >>insistence that consciousness appears when action meets an
>> obstacle. I'm
>> >>pretty confident he says this as early as Educational Psychology,
>> and as
>> >>late as T&S, but I can't track down specific citations at this
>> moment.
>> And
>> >>this links to David's comments about volition. Consciousness occurs
>> when
>> our
>> >>prereflective action is blocked, and we must deliberate, look
>> around,
>> and
>> >>consider alternatives. A two-way link to volition: Cs arises from
>> practical
>> >>activity, and serves to reorganize that activity. Cs gives us the
>> will
>> to do
>> >>what is hard to do, what needs to be done, what at first grasp seems
>> >>impossible to do.
>> >>
>> >>And while I'm cutting and pasting from my notes, this is from the
>> last
>> pages
>> >>of Educational Psychology:
>> >>
>> >>"Man has set himself the goal of becoming master of his own
>> feelings, of
>> >>lifting the instincts to the heights of consciousness and making
>> them
>> >>transparent, of stretching the thread of will into what is
>> concealed and
>> >>into the underground, and to thereby lift himself up to a new
>> stage, to
>> >>create a 'higher' sociociological type, a, so to speak, super-man."
>> 351
>> >>
>> >>None of this gives my students a *definition* of consciousness. But
>> perhaps
>> >>one has to be satisfied with a *history* of it, a story that
>> describes
>> how
>> >>it comes into being and then departs again.
>> >>
>> >>Martin
>> >>
>> >>On 2/9/07 11:24 AM, "Vera Steiner" <vygotsky@unm.edu> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>>I sent my message on consciousness before reading Martin's "harried
>> >>>instructor seeks words of wisdom." It is a fine discussion, and my
>> >>>apologies for not referring to it in my somewhat differently
>> focused
>> >>>comments.In my class last night, I tried to differentiate between
>> >>>responsiveness, awareness and consciousness, a hard task, but if
>> anyone
>> >>>is interested, I would be willing to struggle with it some more in
>> our
>> >>>discussions. Right now, I have to leave the house and the computer,
>> >>>Vera
>> >>>
>> >>>Martin Packer wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>Trying to get the worms out of one can I seem to have opened
>> another,
>> but
>> >>I
>> >>>>think David may have rescued me before I started to ask. Trying to
>> >>explain
>> >>>>why studying consciousness was important to Vygotsky, I started
>> with
>> the
>> >>>>assertion that for him (and me too) consciousness is in our
>> interaction
>> >>with
>> >>>>the world. I suppose that all animals have consciousness, perhaps
>> even
>> >>>>plants in some sense, since they respond to changes in the
>> environment
>> >>(day
>> >>>>& night; the movement of the sun) and so must sense these in some
>> way.
>> >>But
>> >>>>human consciousness is, one supposes, much more complex, and it
>> develops.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>If consciousness is in our interactions, not in our heads, that is
>> >>helpful
>> >>>>when we are trying to avoid dualistic thinking. And, yes,
>> Vygotsky
>> was
>> >>>>trying to give a materialistic account of consciousness, which at
>> first
>> >>>>seems pretty contradictory.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Psychology today generally doesnıt consider consciousness: in one
>> class
>> >>one
>> >>>>might study memory, in another perception, in a third language,
>> and so
>> >>on.
>> >>>>> From Vygotskyıs point of view this has divided up something
>> unitary
>>
>> >>after
>> >>>>all, in my conscious existence I am thinking at one moment,
>> remembering
>> >>>>something the next, then imagining something, talking, ... and
>> even
>> this
>> >>>>account divides consciousness up too much. So the proper study of
>> >>>>consciousness is the study of all these functions in their
>> >>>>interrelationship. It is, I said, only to keep things simple that
>> >>Vygotsky
>> >>>>focuses mainly on thinking and talking in the book we are reading.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>I said some more. I said it in (bad) Spanish and now I canıt
>> remember
>> it
>> >>in
>> >>>>English!
>> >>>>
>> >>>>And they said, okay, very good, but what was Vygotskyıs
>> definition of
>> >>>>consciousnessı? Give us a definition of consciousness, and keep
>> it
>> >>concise
>> >>>>and formal. They said this with a (collective) smile, so I know
>> they
>> >>werenıt
>> >>>>expecting a dictionary definition, even before reading Davidıs
>> message.
>> >>But
>> >>>>I wasnıt able to give a (good) answer.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>David, for me, too, consciousness is not cognition. I completely
>> agree
>> >>with
>> >>>>you that volition is crucial for Vygotsky. (For example, I think
>> >>Vygotskyıs
>> >>>>position on scientific concepts is misunderstood when people say
>> that
>> >>such
>> >>>>concepts enable self-control; V is clear that itıs the other way
>> round:
>> >>>>self-control, mastery of oneıs own psychological functions, makes
>> such
>> >>>>concepts possible.) But Iım not entirely comfortable *equating*
>> >>>>consciousness with volition. I guess for a first shot Iıd say that
>> >>volition
>> >>>>is a relation between consciousness and functions that lack
>> >>consciousness.
>> >>>>One thing I like about this formulation is that it includes the
>> >>possibility
>> >>>>that consciousness is social, intersubjective, and that
>> self-control
>> has
>> >>its
>> >>>>roots in control-by-others. And I do believe that this was
>> Vygotskyıs
>> >>>>position (in-itself; for-others; for-itself). But having put it
>> this
>> >>way
>> >>>>one has to distinguish carefully between consciousness and
>> >>>>self-consciousness, no?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Enough for one day. Iım off for enchiladas. More words of wisdom
>> from
>> >>XMCAıs
>> >>>>collective consciousness will be much appreciated!
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Martin
>> >>>>
>> >>>>p.s I think Osimbologia may be a Nahuatl word. ;) I saw a
>> wonderful
>> >>>>Spanish-Nahuatl dictionary the other day. Any takers?
>> >>>>_______________________________________________
>> >>>>xmca mailing list
>> >>>>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> >>>>http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>_______________________________________________
>> >>>xmca mailing list
>> >>>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> >>>http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>_______________________________________________
>> >>xmca mailing list
>> >>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> >>http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>> >>_______________________________________________
>> >>xmca mailing list
>> >>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> >>http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >--
>> >//
>> >
>> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---
>> >/Ana Marjanovic-Shane, Ph.D./
>> >/151 W. Tulpehocken St./
>> >
>> >/Philadelphia//, PA 19144///
>> >
>> >/(h) 215-843-2909/
>> >
>> >/ana@zmajcenter.org <mailto:ana@zmajcenter.org>/
>> >
>> >/http://www.speakeasy.org/~anamshane <
>> http://www.speakeasy.org/%7Eanamshane>/
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >xmca mailing list
>> >xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> >http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>> Hegel Summer School 16/17th February 2007. The Roots of Critical
>> Theory -
>> Resisting Neoconservatism Today
>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/seminars/16022007.htm
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 01 2007 - 10:36:50 PST