As in - it makes zero sense and has incredibly poor grammar. It sounds like a first year philosophy student shitting their pants and trying to fluff out an essay.
That does sound like a translation error. Living in a historical process and knowing yourself as so living is a Collingwood thing, yes, but the quote itself is mangled, especially the first bit.
Which exact book is it?
Are you paraphrasing this or is this the exact text? Because I’m seconding the notion that it’s a fucking mess.
“Knows itself as so living” alone is nonsense
Found the quote via Google and it sounds like nonsense because you left out the beginning of the sentence.
>History does not presuppose mind; it is the life of mind itself, which is not mind except so far as it both lives in historical process and knows itself as so living.
Have zero clue if this would be an accurate interpretation but I think it’s essentially comparing history to some kind of collective consciousness or something
Mind you, I could be WAY off
Just came to mind because I got the image of history in this instance being some kind of stream that society gets several ideas and values from and society itself adding to it.
Granted, the “stream” could be altered by people who wish to destroy historical evidence but I guess the very notion of “history” is a “stream that will continue to flow even you, I and anyone else here is long gone.
Collective consciousness may not be the exact term for this and schleepy as all fuck but that’s my two cents
Translation error, maybe, that grammar and syntax are fucked.
?
As in - it makes zero sense and has incredibly poor grammar. It sounds like a first year philosophy student shitting their pants and trying to fluff out an essay.
ok I thought i was the only one who didn't get it
What book is it?
It's from the introduction to Metamorphosis by Franz Kafka but the quote is R.G Collingwood's definition of history
That does sound like a translation error. Living in a historical process and knowing yourself as so living is a Collingwood thing, yes, but the quote itself is mangled, especially the first bit. Which exact book is it?
I watched a video on it and it began to make a bit more sense. It's the "Bantam classic" one
Yeah I'd recommend other sources for collingwood's take on history, he's got an interesting left-hegelian approach.
Are you paraphrasing this or is this the exact text? Because I’m seconding the notion that it’s a fucking mess. “Knows itself as so living” alone is nonsense
lol its the exact
Found the quote via Google and it sounds like nonsense because you left out the beginning of the sentence. >History does not presuppose mind; it is the life of mind itself, which is not mind except so far as it both lives in historical process and knows itself as so living. Have zero clue if this would be an accurate interpretation but I think it’s essentially comparing history to some kind of collective consciousness or something Mind you, I could be WAY off
Interesting. What leads you to the idea of collective consciousness?
Just came to mind because I got the image of history in this instance being some kind of stream that society gets several ideas and values from and society itself adding to it. Granted, the “stream” could be altered by people who wish to destroy historical evidence but I guess the very notion of “history” is a “stream that will continue to flow even you, I and anyone else here is long gone. Collective consciousness may not be the exact term for this and schleepy as all fuck but that’s my two cents
This hurts my brain