[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