what role do history and anthropology play against each other. History (labour, production, accumulation, increase the real costs) exists only to the extent that people as a natural being is finite; this finiteness of human existence extends far beyond the original boundaries of the kind and the immediate bodily needs are continually, albeit barely heard accompanied it echoed the whole development of civilizations. Than stronger one establishes himself in the center of the world, the farther he is progressing in the mastery of nature, the stronger crushes on him the extremity of his own being, the more nearly he approaches death. History does not allow man to go beyond his initial limits-is only apparently, and if it to understand "limits" is very superficial. However, if we consider the fundamental finitude of human existence, becomes it is clear that his anthropological situation makes his Story more dramatic, more dangerous, as if bringing it closer to their own impossible. When the Story reaches these milestones, it can only to stop, be moved slightly around its own axis and to freeze forever. However, this can happen in two ways; either the Story gradually, and more noticeably slowing down, reaches steady state. which claims in the infinity of time what she always wanted and what she, in fact, was initially and consistently; or, on the contrary, the Story reaches a certain turning points, where is fixed only insofar as she manages to overcome all that she was continuously hitherto. In the first solution of the question (represented by the "pessimism" Ricardo) the History serves as a powerful mechanism, complementary the limited anthropological definition; of course, it is not beyond the end of human existence, but this existence she clearly emerges as a positive phenomenon and surround.
what role do history and anthropology play against each
ReplyDeleteother. History (labour, production, accumulation, increase
the real costs) exists only to the extent that people
as a natural being is finite; this finiteness of human
existence extends far beyond the original boundaries of the kind and
the immediate bodily needs are continually, albeit barely
heard accompanied it echoed the whole development of civilizations. Than
stronger one establishes himself in the center of the world, the farther
he is progressing in the mastery of nature, the stronger crushes on him
the extremity of his own being, the more nearly he approaches
death. History does not allow man to go beyond his initial
limits-is only apparently, and if it to understand
"limits" is very superficial. However, if we consider
the fundamental finitude of human existence, becomes
it is clear that his anthropological situation makes his Story
more dramatic, more dangerous, as if bringing it closer to their own
impossible. When the Story reaches these milestones, it can
only to stop, be moved slightly around its own axis and
to freeze forever. However, this can happen in two ways;
either the Story gradually, and more noticeably slowing down, reaches
steady state. which claims in the infinity of time
what she always wanted and what she, in fact, was
initially and consistently; or, on the contrary, the Story reaches a certain
turning points, where is fixed only insofar as she
manages to overcome all that she was continuously hitherto.
In the first solution of the question (represented by the "pessimism"
Ricardo) the History serves as a powerful mechanism, complementary
the limited anthropological definition; of course, it is not
beyond the end of human existence, but this existence
she clearly emerges as a positive phenomenon and
surround.