File spoon-archives/bhaskar.archive/bhaskar_1996/96-05-20.182, message 55


Date: Tue, 23 Jan 1996 19:02:47 +0100
From: bda94-AT-stud.hoe.se (bwanika)
Subject: Re: the ontological status of structures


Thank you Doug for the most elaborative piece;-

I would like to make some points below;-


> So the actors are acting in knowledgeable ways to reproduce the
>rules.  They may not be know that they are thereby reproducing  the
>relation of inequality, which can exist without their awareness. Since
>inequality is not itself a rule or an action, there need be no practice
>constituting it.  I apologize for any apparent flippancy, but inequality
>may exist even without a specific practice that ethnomethodologists might
>call "doing inequality."  Inequality is not a practice but a relationship
>generated by practices.

 Is it not that human actions always follow this trend, to bridge such
inequal relationship generated by practices? For instance in a class
society, or gender relationships ? What is the driving force behind human
actions really ?



> Thus, I do not think that peasants' lack of technological
>knowledge is the key factor.  I think, Bwanika, that the "technological
>fix" represents the kind of concession to western industrialization that
>you oppose.  The Marxist view, I think, would emphasize class structure.
>

I am not opposed to the western industrialization processes .But, I do think
this type of developement should causally be generated by human actions not
as  social constructions.
 I believe, this type of development came out of human resolution to
standing problems.
 Besides, I can't see how the whole world, despite the fact that there
differing contigent structures, should perceive existential relationships as
being monotonic. Now, 'am basing my arguments on the consequences of, i.e.
large scale farming and the so-called green revolution, pollution and urban
problems which the developed world is trying to solve. I can see an
indeterminate position on part of policy makers both in developed and
developing countries.
I remember, reading from Bhaskar  Plato etc., about the chaotic situation
where he gives an example of an airport in the visinity, a hospital, play
ground all congested in one area. This might be a cuasal consequence of
economic determinism which might result into economic indeterminism. What
leads us into such a situations, despite the fact that there is adequate
knowledge to avoid such irrepearable situation?

>The causality is always an historically contextual product of composite
mechanisms.  So similar land tenure may have different consequences in
different countries.
>

Isn't this the situation which should have cuased new ideas and perceptions
in reference to  the  above ?

>
>


Bwanika Daniel
University college =D6rebro



     ------------------


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005