From: "Tobin Nellhaus" <nellhaus-AT-gis.net> Subject: Re: BHA: our options Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:15:05 -0500 Hi all-- Howard wrote: > What might work is some variant of 4. Our discussions could be thematic. > We could take a topic such as agency and then systematically review RB's > contributions, starting with RTS and running through DPF and FEW. This > would provide a common foundation for discussion. Then we can take up > other CR contributions from folks such as ARcher, Harre, Lawson, Norrie, Actually, when you think about it, isn't a thematic approach more or less what we do already? A topic comes up, we ransack Bhaskar's works (and often others') in order to figure out the critical realist theory on that topic, and then we move on. Admittedly, our current practice has plenty of lulls, but the energy they create is also highly notable. The discussions on ontological stratification are a case in point. I've stayed out of the "What book now?" discussion because at the moment I can't promise to keep up with anything. That said, personally I'd like to see our scope expand a bit, because I think that many writers have things to offer CR. Certainly Archer and others already officially in the CR "camp." But also people with no such canonical standing. For example, Howard and I have had many conversations (both on and off list) about what Volosinov and Peirce can contribute to contemporary critical realism. Some scholars consider Bourdieu basically consonant with CR (despite his disavowals). I've been reading folks in cognitive science, like George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, who despite certain shortcomings have many views in common with CR and some intriguing research and analyses. So even though a dedicated reading of a particular book would be highly commendable, Howard rightly observes that they don't sustain us for long. In contrast, topics make us roar. Sorry to sound like a pragmatist -- or maybe I'm not sorry at all! -- but the heck with being virtuous, let's do things that we know get out minds churning. I'd just like to add the option that list members are also explicitly welcome to raise ideas developed outside the official CR circle in order to discuss their merits or possible contributions. --- Tobin Nellhaus nellhaus-AT-mail.com "Faith requires us to be materialists without flinching": C.S. Peirce --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005