These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes, and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving. Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards. If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site, please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.

These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes, and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving. Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards. If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site, please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.

Re: [xmca] second nature

From: Leif Strandberg <leifstrandberg.ab who-is-at telia.com>
Date: Fri Oct 12 2007 - 05:14:39 PDT

Hi,

In Marx' Ökonomische-Philosophische Manuskripte - 1844, you can read
how Marx talks about 'double stimulation'

As far as I remember Ivan Pavlov writes about 'second nature' when he
writes about 'the second signal system'

can it be something for you?

  - hope so

Leif
Sweden

2007-10-12 kl. 05.12 skrev Andy Blunden:

> Anyone have an answer to this one?
>
> I sometimes use the term "second nature" to mean the world of
> artefacts, in contrast to the "first nature" the world of things
> existing before and outside human civilisation. I am interested in
> where this usage comes from.
> According to the Oxford English Dictionary Online, the use of "second
> nature" to mean habits and other aspects of the human character which
> are developed during our life through participation in activity dates
> back to Aristotle, but they record no-one using the term in the way I
> use it. I see that Hegel only used the expression in the sense of
> acquired habits. Max Stirner appears to be the one, much to my
> surprise, who started referring to culture as a "second Nature" but
> who knows what "culture" meant to the author of "The Ego and his Own"?
> Marx in the 1844 manuscripts goes so far as to refer to human needs
> which are "second nature" and it would seem consistent with his idea
> that he should ascribe "second nature" to the objectification of those
> new human needs in the world of artefacts. I do not feel I am
> "betraying" Marx in using the term in that way, but so far as I can
> see Marx and Engels never use it that way themselves.
>
> Any ideas on who first called the world of material culture our
> "second nature" (as opposed to civilised habits)? Was it one of those
> American Pragmatists or Benjamin Franklin or someone?
>
> Andy
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
Received on Fri Oct 12 05:19 PDT 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 20 2007 - 14:25:43 PST