Subject: Re: Leibniz Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 15:37:24 +0100 > Can you please explain what you mean by this phrase? Not any more clearly than I have done already over several posts. > Your point would be? Isn't that a valid, if "fantastically > difficult," intellectual enterprise? Isn't part of any intellectual > enterprise "strewn with all sorts of false trails, snares and decoys"? No. > Perhaps not pedally challenged, but perhaps naive? As perhaps has > already been suggested, what if one could demonstrate that Bourdieu > had taken a course on Leibniz, that his book collection contained > Leibniz's oeuvre with detailed annotations in Bourdieu's own hand, > that he was an enthusiastic channeler of Leibniz in some occult > spiritualist frenzy? :) And why cannot one read Bourdieu by means of > Leibniz in the same way that one might read Joyce by means of Homer? Go ahead. I look forward to reading your thoughts in this direction. I'd also be very interested in hearing about your reading of Joyce by means of Homer; i.e. beyond the kind of reading one can get from Joyce Made Simple or Joyce for Dummies. > And your point would be? So what if Bourdieu inveighed against > journalistic simplifications? Sorry, can't spell it out again. Regards Simon ********************************************************************** Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005