Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 08:55:00 +0200 From: Par Engholm <Par.Engholm-AT-soc.uu.se> Subject: Re: BHA: Polyadization Hi Dai, Mervyn and others, Weel, yes, that's a bit in line what I tried to formulate a couple of days ago, but I think Bhaskar uses the notion of primary dyadization and polyadization more as a way of marking his case off from all identity theories, which he assembles under the umbrella of 'The Primal Squeeze on the Platonic fault-line' and further of the 'anthroporealist exchanges' (see e.g. PE 49). The notion of 'detachment' is central to this critique of identity theories (epistemic/ontic fallacies). We are acquiring a sense of selfhood via this socialisation/polyadisation by an enactment of existential and cognitive/perceptual detachment - which involves e.g. what Polanyi speaks of (following to some degree Gestal psychology) as an identification of a non-random 'identifieable' object against its 'accidental surroundings' (Personal Knowledge 38). Indeed the notion of primary polyadization could be regarded as being 'a calque on the much better established (practically omnipresent) term "primary socialization"', but it not only corrects its 'metaphysical and ontological assumptions'; its argument is established quite differently. Bhaskar again argues for the necessity of an ontological distinction between the different domains of the world (domains of the real, actual, empirical, positive, negative...) using transcendental arguments. Monism and solipsism are refuted in an argument which uses a reductio ad absurudum: 'Whoever autogeneticized themselves?' (DPF 230) Perhaps we can also find a little bit of Marx of the 'Theses on Feuerbach' squeezed in here too, especially the third... Best, Pär At 01:13 2004-09-22, you wrote: >Hello again Mervyn, > >I have just remembered something that I intended to mention three years ago >but never got round to it... which is my suspicion that "primary >polyadization" is a calque on the much better established (practically >omnipresent) term "primary socialization", popularized by Berger and >Luckman, following G. H. Mead, although quite conceivably in use in social >psychology before them, and very, very much in the air in the Sixties and >Seventies. > >To refresh memories, here's a para. from someone's summary of Berger & >Luckman's *Social Construction of Reality*: > >1. Primary socialization is a type of socialization during childhood through >which people first become a member of a society. It ends when the concept of >"generalized other" - abstraction of roles and attitudes from concretely >visible significant others - has been firmly entrenched in the consciousness >of a child. When this generalized other has been crystallized within the >consciousness, the objective and subjective realities become "symmetrical" >within the mind of the child. What is presented as objectively real in the >outside world in turn becomes the subjective reality in the mind of the >child, too. > >http://ssr1.uchicago.edu/NEWPRE/CULT98/Berger.html > >If I'm right, then "primary polyadization" refers to "primary socialization" >while at the same time marking a rejection of the metaphysical or >ontological assumptions of social interactionism. > >It's a bit closer than the Pythagoreans... > >Regards, > >Dai > > > > > --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- ----------------------------------------------------------- Par Engholm; Par.Engholm-AT-soc.uu.se Uppsala University, Dept. of Sociology Box 624; SE-751 26 Uppsala; SWEDEN Phone: +46 18 471 7399; Fax: +46 18 471 1170 Home: Botvidsgatan 14 B; SE-753 27 Uppsala Phone: +46 (0)18 696348; Mobile: +46 709 783546 http://www.soc.uu.se/staff/par_e.html --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005