File spoon-archives/bhaskar.archive/bhaskar_2003/bhaskar.0312, message 244

Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 08:48:24 +0000
Subject: Re: BHA: Voloshinov etc


Thanks - just wanted to establish whether it was just Lacan or 
psychoanbalysis in general that was the case.


Tobin Nellhaus wrote:

>"Steve" wrote:
>>Being a 'realist' (in relation to science) is whilst misguided but
>>probably understandable, but being anti-psychoanalysis as well as
>>anti-(saussurian style) linguistics - quite probably we'd come to
>>serious intellectual blows over such reactionary positions...
>"Steve" has misread me, since I didn't say I oppose anti-psychoanalysis,
>only Lacan, whose ideas (last I heard) are not the only theories of
>psychoanalysis.  There was, for example, Freud.  Of course, "Steve" could
>still be correct, but he has no way to know whether he is or isn't.
>Be that as it may, so long as "Steve" is tossing around political
>accusations, I'd like to note that I for one do not think that realism
>necessarily entails any particular political stance (much as I wish it did).
>On the other hand, I don't think it's possible to have coherent progressive
>politics *without* being a realist.  Otherwise, one has no basis for
>believing that some person or group has in fact experienced harm -- they
>could merely be whiny weakling freeloaders looking for a handout, and anyone
>who believes them is just a gullible oaf, right?
>Tobin Nellhaus
>"Faith requires us to be materialists without flinching": C.S. Peirce
>     --- from list ---

--- StripMime Warning --  MIME attachments removed --- 
This message may have contained attachments which were removed.

Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- 
  text/plain (text body -- kept)

     --- from list ---


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005