[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Living metaphor and conventionalized language
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011, Larry Purss wrote:
What happens to con-scientia in the movement FROM "in itself" TO
"for-itself" THROUGH others. What happens to con-scientia when inner speech
develops. What happens to con-scientia when speech becomes ABBREVIATED.
John Shotter's article in the "papers for discussion, 2011]" takes Bakhtin's
insights of utterances as being used TO MOVE others as an answer to deepen
our understanding of knowledge and cognition withIN intra-activity AS
FUNDAMENTALLY continuing to be con-scientia. How particularly con-scientia
is sublated is an open question?
Thanks for these questions, Larry
Your use of "con-scientia" is helpful. It interrupts, or at least
refracts, the discourse of scientia.
The theme for the 2012 AERA meeting is "Non Satis Scire: To Know is Not
Enough," which reflects a sense of "Scire" or "scientia" as something that
stops short of action/inter-action. This is how scire/scientia has come to
be understood in the culture of positive science, with its disparagement
of mere cognoscere / connaisance / conocimiento.
The scire/cognoscere savoir/connaitre dichotomy presupposes scientia as
not con-scientia. It's good to challenge that. Scire/scientia derives from
the same proto-Indoeuropean root as "scissors," so it presumes (and in
positivistic science, is predicated on) the methodological pre-scission of
the "con" from the "scientia"
xmca mailing list