Re: [ox-en] "Selbstentfaltung", "self-unfolding" or what?
- From: Stefan Meretz <stefan.meretz hbv.org>
- Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 21:33:07 +0100
Hi Graham,
Graham Seaman wrote:
>>>So 'unfolding' in this sense isn't new to English after all. But it
>>>does lead to another question: why 'self'? In the discussion of the
>>>term on this list (ie. en-) it seemd to be necessary to explain that
>>>it didn't refer to purely isolated individuals, or was not possible
>>>for isolated individuals, but was something social (since the 'self-'
>>>implied not being social, which was also the problem with
>>>'self-development').
>
> This is an important point, as I never liked the prefix "Selbst" in
> "Selbstentfaltung" very much. You expressed the problem I had with
> that prefix very clearly.
> This became even more obvious, when I read Stefan Mn. writing on the
> german mailing list about "indiviluelle/persoenliche Selbstentfaltung"
> (individual/personal selfunfolding).
I like to point out, why the self is essential in this concept.
Spontaneously some people react as you, Graham, expressed: "Why only the
isolated individual? Isn't free software more an altruistic movement
than an egoistic one?"
But that isn't what I wrote at all.
I was too fast in my generalization, sorry. You're right. I only pick
your sentense...
Take my lines seperatly as a standpoint to egoistic vs. altruistic, e.g.
as a comment to corresponding nettime debate;-)
My contrast is not between 'egotism'
and 'altruism' (which I think is a contrast that leads nowhere in this
context), but between 'personal' and 'social'. And there is no need to
associate these terms solely with the political seperation between
man/citizen, or economic separation between creator of use value and
creator of exchange value analyzed by Marx; there is still a large part of our
daily lives (in particular with family or friends) where it is true that
I am not sure if I understand right: Isn't the contast of personal vs.
social the same story as egoistic vs. altruistic - in the sense I
addressed with egoistic-altrustic "objective form of thinking"? A human
being is societal by nature!
My self-unfolding is a prerequisite of the unfolding of all and vice
versa.
One aspect of free software is that it expands the small social sphere of
friends to the whole social spere of software users. In both cases
I don't see why the phrase
Yes, because it established outside commodity sphere.
My self-unfolding is a prerequisite of the unfolding of all and vice
versa.
has any more content (or different meaning) than:
'my personal unfolding is a prerquisite of the unfolding of all and
vice-versa'.
and in fact, if it did, surely you would have had to write:
' My self-unfolding is a prerequisite of the self-unfolding of all and
vice versa.'
Sorry, but I'm having trouble seeing any content in this argument, it
seems to be only about the form of the words... I certainly don't see why
choosing 'self-unfolding' as opposed to 'peronal unfolding' brings
an end to commodity fetishism any closer. Well, having said that, of
course I can't seriously argue that it is important NOT to say/write
'self-unfolding' ... :-)
??? Where is the problem ???
I only try to argue why the "self" (or "personal" if you like, this
doesn't matter) is important.
I am confused...
Ciao,
Stefan
--
Vereinte Dienstleistungsgewerkschaft ver.di
Internetredaktion
Potsdamer Platz 10, 10785 Berlin
--
stefan.meretz verdi.de
maintaining: http://www.verdi.de
private stuff: http://www.meretz.de
--
_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/