[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Living metaphor and conventionalized language
As I mentioned, these are new ideas [for me]. At this point on the "path" I
would agree that language is a cental aspect of sublation as you articulate
it. I'm wondering, however, if there is a danger in the linguistic "turn"
to dissolve more into language than is warranted. As you mention
"thinking" is an aspect of consciousnss. Language is also an aspect of
consciousness. E-motion is also implicated in consciousness. Critically,
perception is implicated in consciousness. And con-scientia is a central
aspect of consciousness. Now all these phenomena are chiasmicly intertwined
in forms of EMERGENT knowing. Also, "systems of meaning" [as previously
organized ways of knowing/perceiving] are implicated in EMERGING
consciousness. As one example Ingold's 1999 article explores how biologist's
"see" genomes as pre-existing forms [structures] which carry
information INTO INTER-activity [not intra-activity]. These cultural
"systems" of meaning [grounded in the linquistic] also SHOW us ways to pay
attention [and form perspectives]
But as you point out the process of sublation MAY lead to ENCAPSULATED
selves [in particular historical forms of ORGANIZED life] BUT this is only
one particular arrangement which guides us withIN con-scientia, towards a
particular type of "perspectival realism" [Jack Martin] or "way of life" and
a particular KIND of person. I am willing to grant language a KEY place in
this movement of history/development as an EMERGENT type of consciousness.
As I am SHOWN more and pay closer attention I may come to accept language as
being more centrally CONSTITUTIVE withIN intra-activity.
The question however is; "Is language the GROUND or PRIMARY or the SOURCE
of movement/development or should we follow Merleau-Ponty's example and
wonder if we should turn away from searching for the ground or essence or
primary phenomena from which the other phenomena are derived.
Merleau-Ponty's answer is to look to EXPRESSION as chiasmic intertwining
that is con-scientia.
As I read chapter 7 of Vygotsky's Thinking and Speech, his theory/method as
a way of looking at the intertwining of thought and language is an example
of how we can proceed with exploring sublation as a movement from "in
itself" to "for itself" that in particular situations leads to "encapsulated
selves" but NOT necessarily. Are there situations where the movement
towards others as ENGAGEMENT is MET and MARKED in different ways of life
leading to radically different selves. This is not a romantic vision that
doesn't recognize the struggle for recognition. However, it is the
phenomenological scholars such as Merleau-Ponty, Binswanger, and Martin
Buber who were pointing to ways of life that MAY POTENTIALLY lead to selves
which are not encapsulated.
It is important to distinguish these phenomenological writers of
"con-scientia" with the alternative phenomenological perspectives which lead
to a vision of encapsulated selves.
I will end by fully endorsing your interpretation of self-mastery as growing
personal awareness and freedom to act [I would add agentically] withIN a a
social world. If we change the word "act" to "move" in a social world, we
enter the language of e-motion and con-scientia [acting or moving with
others]. Not in INTER activity [implies pre-formed entities] but moving
[and being moved] withIN INTRA-activity as a contnuously emerging historical
Martin, I've still to engage with Foucault's work but am fascinated with the
poststructuralist exploration of "subjectivication" and the "agential" as
developing as two sides of the same coin. Have to struggle with that
perspective but I intuitively sense a deep truth in that tension. Without
subjectivization there is no self-mastery or growing personal awareness and
freedom to act/move. Karen Barad engages with Foucault and Butler with deep
respect but questions if they lean too heavily to the linquistic.
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Martin Packer <email@example.com> wrote:
> I wouldn't disagree at all. Development may, in some/many cultures, be a
> matter of differentiating self out of a self-other unity, but the
> differentiation is never total, and it remains built upon an ineliminable
> interdependency with others. Without others I would not eat, yet alone
> develop, even as an adult. I'm inclined to see LSV's focus on self-mastery
> as more of a growing ability to act with personal awareness and freedom in a
> social world, rather than a development of an encapsulated self.
> Perhaps we differ - I'm not sure - in that I think sublation can be an
> aspect of language; language, as you write later in your message, is a way
> to move others, and to move self. Foucault talked of the practices of
> relationship to oneself as "power folded," as action on one's own actions,
> and of subjectivity itself as a "folding." This is one aspect of what EM
> calls the "action import" of utterances.
> On Aug 13, 2011, at 4:48 AM, Larry Purss wrote:
> > Now I'm biased to think becoming "other-directed" continues to be a
> > aspect of development. "self-mastery may also be central as an aspect
> > agency but I'm biased to believe self-mastery continues to be intertwined
> > with being other directed. The term "complementary" may capture this
> > intertwining. It is only in our pre-occupation with the encapsulated self
> > that we loose sight of the centrality of other for development.
> > Martin, your exploring sublation as a concept that explores moving from
> > being "in itself" to being "for itself" THROUGH OTHERS is I believe the
> > to understanding this particular aspect of consciousness. This is NOT a
> > linquistic movement [IN language]. It is IN our SHOWING [Merleau-Ponty]
> > NOTICING [John Shotter] developing SKILL [Ingold] as INTRA-ACTIVITY
> > Barad]. Development IS "the movement" of intra-activity, Development
> > IS the relational dance as the source FROM which subjectivity and
> > emerge .
> xmca mailing list
xmca mailing list