Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 19:25:47 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re: cantakerousness


On Mon, 14 May 2001, bourdieu-digest wrote:

> bourdieu-digest          Monday, May 14 2001          Volume 01 : Number 451

> Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 06:17:45 +0100
> From: "Simon Beesley" <simonb-AT-beesleys.freeserve.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: Leibnitz

> I would argue that my approach is more faithful to the spirit of
> Bourdieu's thought 

Is this the aim?  This is probably where I beg to differ.

Academics can be rude, French academics likewise, and Bourdieu himself too
(though I consider a particularly good example Derrida's response to the
two who were at the time graduate students and whose names I've just
forgotten for the moment now, in _Critical Inquiry_).  Our man Pierre will
point out that there is more at stake in rudeness than manners--or that
there's more at stake in manners than rudeness.  Quel surprise.

But here, on this list, there's also the issue of conducting a
conversation or discussion.  And there will be often what one considers
banalities in conversation (though for what it's worth, I thought the
original question on Leibniz was fair enough).

Simon, is yours the dream of a perfectly transparent dialogue in which all
extraneousness would be eliminated?  Surely not.

> Simon

Take care

Jon

Jon Beasley-Murray
Spanish and Portuguese
University of Manchester
jon.beasley-murray-AT-man.ac.uk

http://www.art.man.ac.uk/spanish/jbm.html
http://www.art.man.ac.uk/lacs/

**********************************************************************
Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu