Re: [xmca] Classical German Philosophy

[mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com>]

Thanks Andy, and Michael for the section ref to Leontiev.

Could I repeat a second part of my question which appears to have gotten
lost in the multiple threads?

Michael wrote: "you have been breaking out individual (constitutive) moments
of activity and treated them as elements, much like others take the YE
triangle and then break out the object, the subject, the division of labor,
the tools..."

I asked about how one talks about how one breaks out "moments of activity"
(that is how I phrase the matter when I am thoughtful enough to do so), and,
having highlighted them, given the impression that they are
elements in a static sense. What sort of language does one use to be able,
for example, to talk about a particular division of labor, without at least
deep backgrounding, say, the tools being used or the web of social rules
that are recruited in this instance?

Even to say that "everything is connected to everything else" implies some
notion of "things/processes" that are connected. How to avoid
misunderstanding and distinguish it from disagreement?
mike

On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 2:50 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:

> If anyone is interested in exploring the German Idealists, and the roots of
> Activity Theory and Cultural Psychology in their writings, I have put
> together a page :
> http://www.marxists.org/subject/philosophy/german.htm
> where you can browse as you wish ...
>
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca