[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xmca] adverbial qualified movement, action, being

I'm sorry Larry, but I just can't make head nor tail of your post to give a sensible response. All I meant was that if (for example) you were badly injured in a car accident (or something), as they say "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger," so you can either make this lived-experience into a life-experience and grow out of it, or you can just get better and go right back to where you were the day before the accident. That's all. I was asking if that connotation is in the Spanish word /vivencia/.


Larry Purss wrote:
The discussion of vivencia has me pondering

The turn to discussing "vital experience" or being as qualified being [not
qualia] seems to be an opening with potential and possibility.

you ask if it is what we "make" of an experience that is determinative if it
is "vital".  I would suggest that the term how we "participate" rather than
"make" is central to exploring "vital experience".  Making is one particular
approach to engaging vital experience.  This is a vital experience that
transforms the individual person's orientation within the world.  This is an
agentive response that has the quality of being a "personal" decision.  I
would like to suggest this is one particular way to intergrate "vital
experience in our proceeding along pathways. I would even suggest this may
be the particular way forward that is biased as an approach within modernity
as an ethical way of life.
>From this perspective "vital experience" can be personally "undergone" and
through struggle and courageously exploring of personal inscapes the person
can change direction and "make" something different of their lives

 However, alternatively, the person could possibly be "met" [alterity] and
in this "I-YOU" meeting "vital experience" is transformed and new pathways
open.  I wonder if this alternative way of engaging "vital experience" is
through "witnessing" [as I explored recently] This is another way of
engaging "vital experience" that does not emphasize the personal courageous
aspect of transformation [as making] but rather points to "being met" within
the "vital experience".

I've contrasted and made distinct two possible openings of development
[transformation or in*formation]  One emphasing a journey through inscapes,
the other through intersubjective "holding environments". In actuality there
may be multiple flow-forms and interweavings of these multiple strands of
"vital experience"  What I'm pointing to is our socio-cultural biases in
modernity  to validate the "inscapes" as legitimate [good] pathways of
transformation while invalidating the inter-subjective witnessing pathways
to transformation.  [as dependency and defended against] In other words we
don't really "trust" the other will actually respond to the calling of "vial
Andy, I grant that after being "met" [which I believe may be developmental
in its own movement] there follow other phases or levels of transformation
that bring us back to "spaces of reason" "propositional language games"
"agentive stances of *making* ones way in the world", etc.
 This becomes a cultural-historical narrative of projects and objects and
activity.  I also grant "meeting" as I'm discussing it is "normative" and an
ethical stance towards alterity [including one's own alterity].  However as
a particular form of participation it may have as much validity and
legitimacy as the moe courageous form of turning towards inscapes for

xmca mailing list

*Andy Blunden*
Joint Editor MCA: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hmca20/18/1
Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857

xmca mailing list