Re: [OPE] Diversity and Unity

From: Paul Zarembka (
Date: Sat Apr 12 2008 - 11:07:38 EDT

--On 4/10/2008 3:29 AM -0400 wrote:

> When you say "a" you refer to a particular tree, implying that there are
> many other particular trees. But when you say 'TREE' you refer to the
> NATURE of that one tree and herewith you link it to many other trees and
> you establish thereby a class of objects by referring to their nature. In
> short, in your example "a" refers to diversity and "tree" to unity: "a
> tree" refers to diversity and unity at the same time.


Let me reply only to the above.  I note that unity above refers to TREE. 
But TREE is within a much, much larger natural context so why is TREE the 
unity and not any other larger natural context>  In the opposite direction, 
why not OAK TREE instead of that larger category TREE?

And let's move quickly to political economy.  Where is unity in this 
context.  Is DELL COMPUTER the unity or is COMPUTER the unity.  Or is 
PRODUCTION the unity, or is SOCIAL FORMATION the unity.  I hope you get my 
drift.  Either unity is a slippery concept, or you must impose a premise on 
the unity
to begin intellectual work.


THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF 9-11, P. Zarembka, editor, Seven Stories, May 2008
 $14 pre-sale at

ope mailing list

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 30 2008 - 00:00:18 EDT