File spoon-archives/bhaskar.archive/bhaskar_2001/bhaskar.0111, message 23

Subject: RE: BHA: ontology, ontic, etc
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 01:30:16 -0000

Ruth wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> []On Behalf Of Ruth Groff
> Sent: 27 November 2001 02:44
> To:
> Subject: RE: BHA: ontology, ontic, etc
> Hi Phil,
> You wrote:
> >Where is the dialectics here?  To me, this approach seems to be about
> >qualifying and hopefully gradually improving and tinkering with Bhaskar's
> >ontology, overlooking the pressing problem about Bhaskar's
> epistemology.
> What approach?  Whaddaya talking about?  All I said was: "Here's
> what he's on about.  Plus, it seems wrong when you think about
> the social sciences."
> [As for Adorno and Co., I actually had Horkheimer's "Traditional
> and Critical Theory" in mind when I added that one sentence in
> which I said that it seems wrong (for reasons that could
> certainly be described as dialectical).]
> Confused,
> r.

I believe you know very well what I am talking about.  Is it too Nietzschean
of me to suggest that instead of starting by trying to give a loyal and
frozen account of Roy's method, you instead start sceptically by questioning
the epistemological presuppositions lying behind Roy's work?  Is it or is it
not true that Roy has an epistemological presupposition that the subject
should seek to dominate the object?  The question answers itself.  To me,
Roy's work is suffused with identity reasoning.  It's back to NEGATIVE

For critical thought,

>      --- from list ---

     --- from list ---


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005