From: AHAGGERT-AT-aol.com Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 00:02:31 EDT Subject: Re: Gopnik blame --part1_1aa.1900bc4.29ff7157_boundary I vote for the "reductivist, journalistic vulgate" camp. What's irritating about the Gopnik article is the casual--and typical--way in which questionable assertions are tossed off as gospel truth. The burden should be on Gopnik to prove his assertion about Bourdieu's attitude towards parliamentary democracy, something which I doubt could be accurately summed up in a sentence or two. Andrew Haggerty In a message dated 4/29/02 5:55:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, timolindman-AT-hotmail.com writes: > Any takers? Does Bourdieu's work reveal or insist on such a low opinion of > parlimentary politics, or is Gopnik's characterization dismissable as > merely > an example of a reductivist, journalistic vulgate? > > > Timo Lindman --part1_1aa.1900bc4.29ff7157_boundary
HTML VERSION:
Any takers? Does Bourdieu's work reveal or insist on such a low opinion of
parlimentary politics, or is Gopnik's characterization dismissable as merely
an example of a reductivist, journalistic vulgate?
Timo Lindman
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005