Originally posted on sciy.org by Ron Anastasia on Mon 25 Jul 2005 06:48 PM PDT
From: "Richard"
Date: July 25, 2005 6:48:07 PM PDT
To: rjon@vzavenue.net
Subject: Re: Intersubjectivity, individual and collective yoga (from Guy)
just to add a bit to Debashish's excellent assessment of affective
intersubjectivity, I'd like to forward a message (edited) sent to me by
Guy Burneko, which seems to compliment this notion of shifting from an
ideological to an affective intersubjectivity. (or a co-worlding)
rc
Guy said:
“... this intersubjectivity strikes
me as being always socially embedded and constructed; that is to say,
there are no entirely (social)context independent
individuals/ideas/interests to begin with; thus any subjectivity
associated with persons (inter- or otherwise) is the voicing of a
(always-already) shared worlding (however uniquely, fragmentarily or
argumentatively expressed this everpresent coworlding is) by
co-constituting subjects which (or who) furthermore, to the degree they
are inter-subjectivizing (so to speak) and not just co-locating their
atomic subjectivities in some discourse, is a worlding that compasses
subjects as well as their putative objects. in other words, 'subjects'
and 'objects' are after-the-fact reductions or hypostatizations of an
irreducible ï¬eld of intercourse that only by "special interests" is
divided into subjects, objects, theory, practice, techincal, practical
or emancipatory thises and thats etc. (these special interests are not
necessarily bad boys in noetic evolution, or put another way, their
badboyness may result more from absolutization of and clutching to them
than from any 'essence' or content of them in their nascent forms.)
“stated another way, we all have an
axe to grind, and egoing (in its many beneï¬cial and maleï¬cent colors
and flavors) is one version of this. so here we are, everything that is
said is said by some seeming someone who summarizes and contextualizes
a (social cultural) history and in turn contributes to and effects it.
or at least affects it. some affecting is more effective than others.
(snip)
“now i probably got this wrong
somehow. but the living theme for me is less a system to be remembered
and gotten right than a way of talking and demonstrating effective way-
ing in the world, of giving it a meaningful and fruitful or liberating
heading. of course one mode of doing this is read the stuff, do your
practice and shut up. from time to time we all do this. in another
sense, there is a way of doing this while also doing the other things
the world does—debating, watering the lawn, philosophizing, politicing.
and this way, i suspect, is the non-coercive ego-abated way of attuning
to the multiplicity of diverse events at any time, circumstantially,
nonnideologically and unegoistically and nonformulaically 'integrating'
them or integrating 'with them' and in so doing, allowing them mutually
to hybridiize/defer to one another while mutually thereby increasing
the best contrubution of each in the overall holism of the present
moment. the premise of a transcendent aim, attractor, sponsor is less
crucial here than is the authenticity and spontaneity of
inter-engagement at any time of the contributory person/s. stated
another way, circumstantial in-the-moment integrality is the expression
of the transcendent modality. like the poet paul eluard says, there is
another world, but it is in this one.
(snip)
“my love to everybody
guy â€
Attachment: