Antropos16
Da Ortosociale.
m (→Diary of Sara) |
m (→Science: Subject vs. Object) |
||
| Riga 5: | Riga 5: | ||
===Science: Subject vs. Object=== | ===Science: Subject vs. Object=== | ||
| - | The issue of intentionality lies in the relationship between the observing subject and observed object in epistemology. In fact it explains the relation between them, in the sense that modern science has removed the intentionality of all ''objects'' in the nature. According to Descartes and Malebranche the animals are "machines". Later, humans will be treated as machines. Socrates used | + | The issue of intentionality lies in the relationship between the observing subject and observed object in epistemology. In fact it explains the relation between them, in the sense that modern science has removed the intentionality of all ''objects'' in the nature. According to Descartes and Malebranche the animals are "machines". Later, humans will be treated as machines. Socrates used the ''daimon''to explain human autonomy. Karl Marx is surprised to discover a ''certain minimum of humanity'' in the very rare factory proletarians met in person (instead of the underclass, the lumpenproletariat, that is simple rogue, outside of history, ie ''not real'', like the female dog who gets to Malebranche kicks for fun apologetically: "she is not suffering because she is a machine!") |
Versione delle 20:18, 17 ago 2012
Intentionality
I draw inspiration from the story of Sara to shape the development of an adaptive culture that overcomes the barrier nature / culture artificially constructed. Recognizing the mechanisms of intentionality, not just on a human level, but also in animals, and perhaps throughout the natural world, could be the way out of the crisis of civilization and culture that we are going through.
Diary of Sara
The Diary of Sara tells the story of a woman, with children, in the North East of Italy, who would like to build a family based on economic security and the unfolding of affections. Her husband Gabriel, despite being a very affectionate father, although absent in the early growth of children (normal for males), aims to competitive sport, which gives to him states of expanded consciousness, but living so lonely. Especially in the work he aims to be realized as a small business owner, enjoying in assuming all risks of the company. Sara is opposed to her husband's project, whose little enterprise building attempt fails (self-fulfilling prophecy). The failure plunges the family into an uncertainty that breaks up the relationship between the couple. Household care intention versus competitive market economy risky game intention . A classic opposition between female intentions versus male intentions. Between Sara and Gabriel was born an everlasting diatribe. Gabriel (rightly) blames his wife for the failure of his project because "not supported" by Sara. Sara (rightly) accuses him of never having taken into account her own project: an happy family picture, made of picnics, friendships, cultural exchange, relationships, intimate and intense living together. The couple live in the "same family" situation? Two "intentions" different with the hunter with bow and arrows that ventures into uncharted territory versus the "mother" who explores and enjoys the finer vibrations of the relational psyche. Perhaps like Eros and Psyche, the female ever present, waiting, the male out all the day. It is just within our psyche/physical-body that we live our experiences, including dreams. As for Sara and Gabriel, both do not know the " intentions" of the other. Hence the drama. They do not communicate because the main purpose of language is to recognize the intentions of the other. Sara and Gabriel, conversely, reject the intentionality of patner and operate in this unconsciousness. See Relevance Theory of Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson and Argumentation Theory, including the pragma-dialectics and pragmatic rules of Habermas and Apel.
Science: Subject vs. Object
The issue of intentionality lies in the relationship between the observing subject and observed object in epistemology. In fact it explains the relation between them, in the sense that modern science has removed the intentionality of all objects in the nature. According to Descartes and Malebranche the animals are "machines". Later, humans will be treated as machines. Socrates used the daimonto explain human autonomy. Karl Marx is surprised to discover a certain minimum of humanity in the very rare factory proletarians met in person (instead of the underclass, the lumpenproletariat, that is simple rogue, outside of history, ie not real, like the female dog who gets to Malebranche kicks for fun apologetically: "she is not suffering because she is a machine!")
