Formal logic and mathematics fall into contradiction eventually ( Russell , Goedel, Zeno ) because they are words , symbolic signs , which are contradictory by definition ; words are symbolic signs which use something to represent something that they are not.
I have Ilyenkov’s _Dialectical Logic_ . I read it some , but didn’t get much . I’ll look again .
By the way , I’m understanding Smaller Logic much better now . Does he use a lot of synonyms ? God = Freedom = Spirit = Idea = Absolute. When I read it like that I get. Plus , I think anthropology-linguistics-semiotics has a deeper understanding of thought than he now . So, I’m critiquing him with the concept ( notion ?) of symbolic signs - arbitrary relation between sign and thing signified concept . mental _pictures_ would be iconographic signs , symbolic, but not fully arbitrary. Symbolic because the picture is not what it represents; not arbitrary because they resemble what they represent.
This is from Andy Blunden’s “The meaning of Hegel’s Logic “
I would substitute for “spirit “ or “God” , “Culture -Language -Custom-Tradition” . Objective reality , the World, Nature are not made by these. But humans conceive of objective reality in terms of language and culture .
“In The Science of Logic and the later and more accessible Shorter Logic the subject is "Logic". As Ilyenkov explains in his essays From the History of Dialectics, Hegel created a revolution in the understanding of Logic by, among other things, widening the field of observation from "propositional algebra" (formal rules governing how the truth of one proposition follows from that of another) to the whole field of materialisation of human practice - social-historical development, science, religion, industry. Consequently, in elaborating the general laws exhibited in the development of human practice, he necessarily also uncovered objective laws true to the objective material world as a whole. "Thought" in the sense in which Hegel is dealing with it, is not just the consciousness of individuals, or even concepts as social-historical products, but rather an intangible "spirit" which corresponds to these most general forms, and enters consciousness as something objective.”
Blunden should say “spirit “ _is_ a socio-historical product that objectively enters consciousness, the brain , by learning language and culture.
The Notion is the Word , I’m thinking ; or the Sentence, the Paragraph, the Book.
Notion = Alphabetic Writing
A human Self , a human Brain has in its memory words -sentences-stories that represent the experiences of many , many other brains, alive and dead brains . We humans uniquely can share our experiences with each other . Human individual thought is thereby “ universal “ , to use one of Hegel’s terms .
A word or sentence gives a human brain the ability to know about things , events , processes that are _displaced_ from the individual’s concrete , immediate experiences, here and now .
The fact that words are not what they represent is what allows them to give a Self , an individual brain to experience the displaced ( I discovered this ; the other concepts are basic anthropology- linguistics - semiotics. I put them together to derive the last proposition)
How does the arbitrary relationship between sign and signified give this capacity to experience the displaced, that which the individual brain has not directly heard , smelled, tasted , touched or seen ? Here’s how I explain it in class. I write my name on the black board - Charles Brown . I point to the letters and say those marks are not me . But they are used to represent me. That’s using something to represent something it is not . It’s identifying differences ; it is the most fundamental unity of opposites , because this is the most fundamental unit of human thought; pace Hegel.
But I digress . My great grand father Brown is dead . But because his name is not dead , it can survive him ( give him a certain immortality). Survive him and pass on to me . He is displaced from me in time , not in my immediate experience. But his name gives me mediated experience of him or his name mediates my experience of him .
Or take almost any word , dog . Contained in dog or dog in sentences or paragraphs or biology text books gives me access to the displaced experiences of millions of others of dogs . I have a certain access to the “universal experience “ which I can’t get from my individual experience.
Displaced = abstract
Abstract experience / Concrete experience Displaced experience/ Concrete immediate experience
( Latin root for abstract is “take from” or “ take away from”; to displace , almost literally. )
Notion = Alphabetic Writing
Here’s a blog on this :
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2021/05/identifying-something-with-something-it.html Here’s a scientific conclusion about the difference between Hegel’s “ Man” and “brutes”: https://owlcation.com/stem/The-difference-between-animal-and-human-communication Something else I noticed: http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2021/04/words-are-little-communisms.html Another on same topics : http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2021/03/theory-of-structure-of-symbols-and.html . Here’s a rough brain model From: Charles Brown
No comments:
Post a Comment