Are we referring to Feuerbach in "Philosophy of the Future":
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/feuerbach/works/future/future0.htm#12
Andy
At 08:25 AM 12/02/2007 +0100, you wrote:
>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
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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 01 2007 - 10:36:50 PST