1887

n Tydskrif vir Geesteswetenskappe - Skakeringe van die begrip - in historiese en sistematiese perspektief : navorsings- en oorsigartikel - : navorsings- en oorsigartikel

Volume 51, Issue 4
  • ISSN : 0041-4751

Abstract

Na aanleiding van die uiteensetting van Garuba en Raditlbalo oor nuanseringe van die term is 'n aantal vrae geformuleer wat rigtinggewend kan wees vir die argumentering in hierdie artikel. Die oorkoepelende fokus is om na die onderliggende (onties-gegewe) eenheid te midde van hierdie verskeidenheid te soek. Terwyl die woord "waarde" ons alledaagse taal via die bemiddeling van wysgerige nadenke betree het, besit die woord "kultuur" 'n ryk-geskakeerde betekenis. Een van die betekenisse hou verband met die idee van "waardes". Hierdie proses is deur die neo-Kantiaanse Badense skool bemiddel en wel deur die siening te ontwikkel dat die resultaat is wanneer die op betrek word. Vanuit 'n suiwer etimologiese gesigspunt is die term egter van die Latynse term "cultura" afgelei. Dit het geboorte geskenk aan die idee dat kultuur resulteer wanneer die natuur getransformeer is deur die gebruik van . Aangesien diere ook werktuie , is die verdere kwalifisering toegevoeg, naamlik dat slegs mense werktuie . Daardeur kon die uniekheid van die mens weliswaar nie gered word nie, want dit sou blyk dat diere ook werktuie kan . Simpson het eventueel die siening verdedig dat slegs die mens gereedskap om gereedskap mee te . Die argeoloog Narr het 'n verdere stap gegee omdat argeoloë besef het dat die vrye menslike vormingsfantasie beantwoord aan drie maatstawwe wat deurslaggewend is vir menslike werktuigvervaardiging. Wanneer mense werktuie maak, mag die en nie by voorbaat gesuggereer wees nie. Die besondere aard van gereedskap as kultuurobjek is dat dit gemaak is om iets anders mee te maak, wat beteken dat sowel die funderings- as kwalifiseringsfunksie daarvan in die kultuurhistoriese aspek te vind is. Aandag word vlugtig gegee aan die erfenis van die moderne natuurwetenskapsideaal, hoewel die fokus nie gerig is op die natuur wat teenoor kultuur staan nie, maar op die veronderstelde natuurtoestand, wat slegs in die maatskaplike verdrag te bowe gekom kan word. Marx het die aannames onderliggend aan hierdie idee raakgesien in die wyse waarop Darwin by diere en plante sy Engelse samelewing onderken het met die verdeling van arbeid wat daarin aanwesig is asook die mededinging en opening van nuwe markte, "skepping" en die Malthusiaanse "stryd om bestaan". By Darwin figureer die diereryk as burgerlike samelewing. Dit was Rousseau wat skerp sou reageer teen die rasionalistiese intellektuele kultuur van die . Hy het dit gedoen in sy pleidooi vir die van die mens. Meer as 'n eeu later het die term in die Westerse samelewing sy verskyning gemaak as deel van die uitdrukking . Die onderskeiding tussen en het aan die begin van die 20ste eeu verskyn en wel deur aan te leun op die onderskeiding wat Kant getref het tussen die gebiede van en ( en ). Die neo-Kantiaanse verskuiwing het alle en binne die mandjie van geplaas deur tegelyk die sosiale werklikheid tot 'n puur feitlike (a-normatiewe) bestaan te denatureer. en is onderskeidelik getipeer in terme van subjek-objek- en subjek-subjekrelasies. Die kultuur-historiese aspek kan ook vanuit niehistoriese aspekte in die visier gekry word. Dan ontmoet ons saamgestelde uitdrukkings soos regsgeskiedenis, kunsgeskiedenis, ekonomiese geskiedenis, godsdiensgeskiedenis, en so meer. kan egter nie as die van mens-wees waardeer word nie, eenvoudig omdat mens-wees steeds méér is as enige sosiaal-gedifferensieerde verbintenis of identiteit waarin mense mag staan. Te midde van die verskeidenheid nuanseringe en uiteenlopende kontekste waar die term aangetref word, bied die (ontiese) struktuur van die kultuur-historiese aspek inderdaad 'n eenheidsperspektief aan ons - 'n perspektief wat nie alleen rekenskap gee van die inherente struktuurelemente van hierdie aspek nie, maar wat ook erkenning verleen aan die gegewe dat alle gebeurtenisse en prosesse in beginsel in alle en derhalwe ook in die kultuur-historiese aspek van die werklikheid funksioneer.


In following up on the exposition of Garuba and Raditlbalo regarding different nuances of the term , a number of questions are articulated that are direction-giving for the subsequent argumentation. The overall focus is to investigate the underlying (ontic) unity amidst the diverse contexts in which the term is found. While the word "value" entered our everyday parlance through the mediation of philosophical reflection, the word "culture" obtained a richly nuanced meaning. One of these meanings relates to the idea of . The neo-Kantian Baden school mediated this process and advanced a view in which culture is seen as the result of relating factual natural reality to values. Yet from a purely etymological point of view, the term is derived from the Latin term for agriculture, "cultura". This generated the idea that culture results when nature is transformed by means of the use of . Since animals are also tools, the further qualification was that only human beings tools. Yet this also did not save the day for the uniqueness of humankind, because it appeared that animals can also tools. Simpson eventually reverted to the perspective that only humans tools to tools. The archaeologist Narr went a step further, because archaeologists realised that the free formative imagination of human beings manifests itself in conformity with three criteria which are decisive for the typical human manufacturing of tools. When tools are made by humans, the , the and the should not be assumed automatically. Tools are and what is peculiar about them is that they are something else, which means that their foundational function and characteristic qualifying function are found within the same aspect of reality, namely the cultural-historical aspect. Attention is briefly given to the legacy of the modern natural science ideal where it is not nature that is opposed to culture, but an assumed hypothetical , which is only transcended in a . Marx discerned the assumptions underlying this idea also in the way in which Darwin recognises among beasts and plants his English society with its division of labour, competition, opening up of new markets, "invention", and the Malthusian "struggle for existence". In Darwin the animal kingdom figures as civil society. It was Rousseau who reacted against the rationalistic intellectual culture of the in his plea for the present within humans. More than a century later the term entered Western society as part of the expression: (in German: ). The distinction between and emerged at the beginning of the 20th century, borrowing from the way in which Kant distinguished between the domains of and ( and ). The neo-Kantian twist assigned all values, norms, beliefs and meaning to as container, while degrading social reality into pure (a-normative) factuality. and are respectively characterised in terms of subject-object relations and subject-subject relations. Attention is given to those aspects that are distinct from the cultural-historical aspect but nonetheless contain an inner connection with the cultural-historical aspect, manifest in expressions such as and . The last part of the article focuses on people in an ethnic sense - as a cultural community. In conclusion a brief indication is given how to avoid both an atomistic (individualistic) and holistic (universalistic) view of human society. Therefore can never be appreciated as the of human life, but merely as one branch amongmultiple other branches. Amidst the diverse nuances and diverging contexts in which the term is met the (ontic) structure of the cultural-historical aspect indeed provides us with a unified perspective. It does not only account for the inherent structural elements present within this aspect, for acknowledgement is also given to the fact that all processes and entities in principle function within all aspects of reality and therefore also within the cultural-historical aspect.

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/akgees/51/4/EJC20254
2011-12-01
2019-08-19

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error