Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 19:10:30 +0100 From: bwanika <h961138-AT-stud.hoe.se> Subject: BHA: Re: Aristotle and all that On this issue again , I just wanted to expose some of my crucial findings. I do not reject Aristotelian philosophy and do I neither regard it supreme to human destiny. Let us take an example of spouse in a constrained world; constrained by legal , political and economic forces. How could spouses reward or punish each other in a constrained world sphere, compared to an unconctrained world sphere, in order to shape their relationship to each other ? A cause, in the above regard can be explained as the constraining effects. Besides, the spouse might be one of the contributing factor to causes. Now how do we move out of this * Aristotelian loop * ? what will be the results of such a relationship and subsequent behaviours be patterned ? Gary sent a very long article about aesthetics he might be interested in this loop. Which i think economist call the game theory. Now how will the rich or the poor turned into occupants of city bridges, or old who are too old play this game and win be reward for being onlookers ? Knowledge , used all over the world is polluted with such constraints. Now, if you imagine a child with the freedom of it's parents in love, care and being a child - the world, the child lives in is a free world, free of constraints because there is a free will to reinforce conscious intentions on both ends, parent and child. Sociology call that socialisation process. Besides ,can we argue that because a genetic scientist discovered this gene or that gene, there is a reinforced conscious intention on the side of the scientist and me the onlooker ? Or take an example of what is called the labour market. I think the largest percentage of workers would say * if * to mean out of the loop. Now, if we assume that human nature is shaped by her effects in her actions, what will the above observation result into ? I am only critical of this criteria for its form of dis- empowerment. Most advanced countries are logged into this Aristotelian loop. It is the always the same causes causing the same causes. If you ask how an urban planner or failing standards in school could be redeemed, one might quickly answer , redeem decline in economic opportunities or low paid teachers etc. I do believe causes can be understood effectively in that manner that what we study, also effectively shapes our presence. An indeed the world is shaped on such studies . Bwanika. At 11:11 11/02/98 -0600, you wrote: >It seems to me that Bhaskar's statement regarding "an efficient cause of >society" has to be understood in terms of the society-language metaphor he >uses and his insistence on the priority of the social in the >society-agency relation as well as the "hiatus" between individuals and >society. Much of this ground has already been covered in previous posts >(though I think the point I'm making never quite emerged), so here I'll >just refer to an early one by Howard that includes the relevant words from >RB: > bwanika ------------------------- "Faith requires us to be materialists without flinching": C.S. Peirce --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005