These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
Very similiar to Ilyenkov's (siq) thinking on the Ideal.
correct?
eric
-----xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu wrote: -----
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
From: Andy Blunden
Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
Date: 06/27/2013 07:28PM
Subject: Re: [xmca] unit of analysis
And here is another quote from the same book, further clarifying
Davydov's view:
The aforementioned requirements can be met only by an entirely
/real/ relationship that is given in a form /that can be
contemplated by the senses/. As an aspect of something concrete –
that is, having its /particular/ form – it at the same time
functions as a genetic basis for another whole (and in this sense it
functions as a universal). Here the real, objective unity of the
individual (particular) and the universal, their /connection/, which
mediates the process of development of the whole, is observed”
(Davydov 1990, p. 282).
Andy
Andy Blunden wrote:
> Eric, here is what Vasily Davydov says in his book on "Generalisation":
>
> The uniqueness of this sort of initial abstraction appears in the
> names for it: “concrete abstraction”, “the concrete-universal
> relationship is the objective cell of the whole that is under
> investigation”, “content-oriented abstraction”, or simply “cell”.
> These names express in different ways the essence of an initial
> abstraction as a simple relationship of concreteness. It
> incorporates the potential of the whole, and at the same time it is
> again reproduced by this whole as its general basis. In our opinion,
> while all of these names are legitimate, it is advisable to use the
> term /content-oriented, real abstraction/. In contrast to formal
> abstraction, it is historical (it is a genetic basis), and its
> content exists /concretely/, in the form of a relationship that can
> be contemplated rather than merely in the mind.
>
> Andy
> ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org wrote:
>> Been considering this in depth recently and have an idea as "germ
>> cell" as an ideal of a conceptualiztion tool.
>> For instance in Yro's moon phase paper the unit of analysis is in
>> understanding knowledge acquisition as what the triangle of actiivy
>> expands upon.
>> Brazil's recent social upheavel would expand upon human subsistance
>> and basic needs.
>> The framework is in place for studying each of these activity systems
>> (perhaps systems isn't best word and another would provide better
>> clarity) with Yro's expanded triangle but because of the diversity of
>> human existence the "germ cell" proposition provides a good platform
>> for how to specify the utilization of the expanded triangle.
>> Thinking out loud
>> what do others think?
>> eric
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> __________________________________________
>> _____
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/ <http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/>
Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
http://marxists.academia.edu/AndyBlunden
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca