File spoon-archives/bhaskar.archive/bhaskar_2001/bhaskar.0101, message 7


Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 12:47:40 -0600
From: Carrol Cox <cbcox-AT-ilstu.edu>
Subject: Re: BHA: Book notice: Creaven, Marxism and Ralism




Andrew Brown wrote:

>  You disagree with the argument:
> fair enough. But obviously mere disagreement doesn't justify
> labelling those with whom you disagree 'dogmatists'. (A term I
> particularly dislike for some reason).

You give the reason for disliking the term. It is almost always
applied to an argument the writer/speaker disagrees with, but
its only *legitimate* use is in application to the expression of
an idea one AGREES WITH. That is, if touches on the *way*
an idea is expressed, not to the idea itself. Thus if one's own
organization or one's own comrades are dogmatic, it is
important to correct that dogmatism. (The same argument
applies to the term "sectarian.")  I have always argued that
those two terms are _always_  unprincipled when applied
to an opponent. In general, criticism of style is unprincipled
when applied to others than one's own allies/adherents/etc.

If you say I am wrong, I can argue or agree. If you say I'm
dogmatic, what am I supposed to do? Lie down and weep?

Carrol Carrol




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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005