From: "Tobin Nellhaus" <nellhaus-AT-gis.net>
Subject: BHA: Re: Conference
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 16:08:48 -0400


Many thanks Caroline for the rich (and enjoyable) sketch of the conference,
and Karl for additional reflections.  I hope some of the papers get posted
at one of the two CR Web sites, they've sparked my curiosity (I do wish I
could have gone).

Your comments touched off a couple thoughts--minor items, to be sure, but
anything to goad us back into discussions.  (I'm glad to hear a few people
in this world can still feel shame, by the way. ;-> )

>        One speaker from the floor encouraged all critical
>realists to rush to the barricades - or maybe he was suggesting that the
>barricades were now situated in the space between postmodernism and
>critical realism.

I don't know if these are the barricades, but I do feel that at this point,
in constantly attacking positivism, RB (and CR) is flogging a dead horse and
consequently making himself appear irrelevant, despite the fact that nothing
could be further from the truth.  On the other hand, I'm doubtful that a
frontal assault on postmodernism (more exactly, poststructuralism) will sway
very many people; a more oblique approach may be necessary.

>                Another asked why critical realism should be left
>wing.  Rachel replied that it was reality, rather than critical realism,
>that led to a left wing perspective.

Yes, the topic has arisen occasionally on the list too.  I'm not sure anyone
has proposed an adequate response; like Karl, I'm skeptical that there's a
necessary political connection.  I also suspect that that's a good thing,
since I know of plenty of people who seem to think concepts and methodology
alone assure their progressive credentials, and they don't have to worry
about what they actually say or do.

>                I argued that 'Alethia' is too
>elitist a title.

Yeah, probably.  It also makes my stomach nervous that "Alethia" in Russian
is "Pravda."  Does that give anyone else pause?  Or am I just starting to
get old?  (Of course, *all* claims of a relationship between journalism and
truth makes me queasy.)  But I'm willing to live with it since I don't have
a better suggestion.  (Somehow I don't think "Absence" would go over.)

>It was felt that while a CR journal might be a good idea, it was not the
>priority - the list of books was.

At the moment I agree, although there might be a case for starting an
electronic journal (rather than a print one).  And there's definitely an
argument for people using the Web sites and associated bulletin boards,
which all make good starting points for something journal-like.  (Yes, I'm
trying to shame a few more people.  I hope that's not too shameless of me.)

Anyway I'd be interested to hear more about the plans for the book.

It's probably too soon, but there's getting to be a reasonable contingent of
CR folks in the US, and due to the traffic the air fares between the US and
the UK are generally decent (often lower than intra-European fares).  In
fact I've seen fares as low as $100 (ca. £60) during price wars.  So a
conference here might be feasible in the not-too-distant.

On a substantive issue:

>          I tore a strip off you dafties who see the psychological
>as exclusively discursive and as emerging only from the social, accusing
>you of Lacanianism among other sins, and of ignoring other psychological
>structures which are emergent from our neurophysiology, such as the
>capacity to learn a language, perception, etc.

Not having the benefit of hearing your paper, I'm generally sympathetic to
your point about the role of neurophysiology, but I have qualms about
treating those structures and the relevant linguistic & social elements as
all being (or resulting in) psychological structures *in the same sense*.
Of course I have no idea whether that is what you are doing.

Cheers, T.
---
Tobin Nellhaus
nellhaus-AT-gis.net
"Faith requires us to be materialists without flinching": C.S. Peirce






     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---