|
Yes, tracing where an idea has come from and the transformations it has
undergone along the way is one of my preoccupations. It always tells me
something important when I find out where an idea has come from (whilst
avoiding the genetic fallacy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy). So yes, Hegel did not absolutely originate this idea. But he certainly did give the concept of abstract-and-concrete a huge development, and his work marks a qualitative break in the evolution of this semantic relation. That's the thing: concepts and words evolve, and can be traced back to times before words were written down, but that does not deny the fact that there are evolutionary "leaps", just as in puncutated evolution. Hegel himself for example included the idea of what we call :puntuated evolution in his idea of abstract and concrete, but did not accept the idea of evolution of species, far less puntuated evolution. Andy Peter Smagorinsky wrote: Thanks Andy, I really am not a philosopher so it's always interesting to learn of the chain of influence. What I'm wondering is, given the notion of intertextuality and likelihood that each of us builds on the shoulders of giants so to speak, whether an idea really originates in any individual? That would defy everything I understand about how people think. Peter Smagorinsky Distinguished Research Professor of English Education Department of Language and Literacy Education The University of Georgia 309 Aderhold Hall Athens, GA 30602 Advisor, Journal of Language and Literacy Education Follow JoLLE on twitter @Jolle_uga -----Original Message----- From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 6:06 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: Re: [xmca] "Rising to the concrete" Peter, this conception of 'concrete' originates from Hegel, and was further developed by Marx, embraced by Vygotsky and has ever since had its place in the CHAT tradition. Evald Ilyenkov wrote an entire book on it: http://www.marxists.org/archive/ilyenkov/works/abstract/ Andy Peter Smagorinsky wrote:I've also found something similar in Scribner: The novice enters the workplace with a stock of knowledge, some school-based and some experience-based, and with certain general problem-solving skills (e.g., mental rehearsal, means-end analysis). An important aspect of learning at work involves adapting this prior knowledge and these general skills to the accomplishment of the task at hand. Such adaptation proceeds by the individual's assimilation of specific knowledge about the objects and symbols the setting affords, and the actions (including cognitive actions) that work tasks require. Domain-specific knowledge reveals relationships that can be used to shortcut those stipulated in all-purpose algorithms; with domain-specific knowledge workers have greater opportunity to free themselves from algorithms and to invent flexible solution procedures. What emerges through this process is a qualitatively different organization of problem-solving procedures from that initially brought to the job. Problem-solving skill in this model implies not only knowledge and know-how but creativity-an attribute of the work group as a social entity if not of each individual within it. . . . Without minimizing the abstract processes involved, it seems appropriate to describe the primary course of attainment of problem-solving skills at work as a process of "concretization." Because of the relative neglect of this process in theory and research, and its educational implications, it warrants emphasis here. (p. 381) The p# refers to the version of this paper in the Selected Writings of SS volume. Peter Smagorinsky Distinguished Research Professor of English Education Department of Language and Literacy Education The University of Georgia 309 Aderhold Hall Athens, GA 30602 Advisor, Journal of Language and Literacy Education Follow JoLLE on twitter @Jolle_uga -----Original Message----- From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Greg Thompson Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 5:23 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [xmca] "Rising to the concrete" Still in between boxes but came across this quote from Lenin today: 'In order to understand it is necessary empirically to begin understanding, study, to rise, from empiricism to the universal. In order to learn to swim it is necessary to get into the water<http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/cons-logic/ch03 .htm#LCW38_205> '. (found at: http://www.marxists.org/archive/pilling/works/capital/pilling3.htm) and it reminded me of one of mike's favorite statements "rising to the concrete." Yet Mike's phrase appears quite different. So Mike, if you're out there, does your "rising to the concrete" bear any significant relation to Lenin's rising to the universal? They seem like very different concepts, no? -greg -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Sanford I. Berman Post-Doctoral Scholar Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition Department of Communication University of California, San Diego http://ucsd.academia.edu/GregoryThompson __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts __________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca |
__________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca