After the Fall (was Re: religious crackpots in public life)

kenneth.mackendrick at utoronto.ca kenneth.mackendrick at utoronto.ca
Sun Jul 9 13:05:51 PDT 2000


On Sun, 9 Jul 2000 13:53:21 -0400 Yoshie Furuhashi <furuhashi.1 at osu.edu> wrote:


> In other words, the "flaw" of the split & fractured subject as theorized in
psychoanalysis = the Original Sin caused by the Fall theorized in Christianity.

Sigh.

We've been through this before, several months ago. There is a qualitative difference between original sin brought about by the fall as theologized in christianity and the OBJECTIVE processes of human development and the formative processes of socialization and individuation.

Self-consciousness cannot be achieved with the aquisition of language (or some such symbolic system that is achived through socialization). Despite our pre-linguistic tendencies, which facilitate language acquisition, the brain isn't hardwired for any *specific* language - otherwise we'd all be speaking the same m(other) tongue. Language-use is, essentially, alienating from our needful state of being (prior to language). This creates a rupture between "being" and "speaking." This rupture can only be "fixed" at the expense of subjectivity. In other words - subjectivity is a forced choice: you either "be" or you "speak." Hence, there is a gap. Language does not spring naturally (so to speak) - it appears only in a social community. Entrance into this community *creates* a kind of second nature in human beings. Exactly how does this correspond to the fall? (where subjectivity is conceived of as full blown and Ideal maturity - *Absolute* freedom of will outside of any and all contingency and social context).

ken



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list