[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Classical German Philosophy
I think that 'backgrounding' is exactly what one does, in the sense that although in ones analysis one focuses on some aspect, one should always remain aware that although this aspect is the foreground, it always exists against a background which should not be discarded or ignored.
Consciousness, then, is not a kind of phenomenon of which we should say that other phenomena are either 'in' it ('inside') or 'out' of it ('outside'). Consciousness is an intentional awareness: consciousness is always *of* something, and that something is itself always one aspect of a larger unity. At the same time consciousness ('mine' let me say) is itself always a moment in something larger; the activities and projects that on reflection I could also say are 'mine,' and in which my labor is divided with that of others, and so that define who (I say) I am.
On Mar 7, 2010, at 11:28 AM, mike cole wrote:
> 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?
> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 2:50 AM, Andy Blunden <email@example.com> 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 :
>> where you can browse as you wish ...
> xmca mailing list
xmca mailing list