Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 15:48:57 -0600 (CST)
From: Kerry <macdonak-AT-Meena.CC.URegina.CA>
Subject: Re: General Question




On Fri, 24 Jan 1997, Ralph Dumain wrote:

> Surely you must be joking, Doug.  Is there some reason to care about
> the people who hold the views I caricature?  Is there some reason they
> deserve respect?  I'm tired ofthis anti-enlightenment ballocks.
> There is a reason I subscribe to frankfirth list instead of Derrida or
> Lyoturd or Baudrillard, but now I'm forgetting what it is.

Now I must admit that I'ven't been following this thread but I still wish 
to interject some observations :)

Though I'm not sure who you are caricaturing, however, to argue that you 
views you don't agree with and then to try to establish that you are 
pro-enlightenment is at best inconsistent.

I say this because the premise of the Enlightenment was that people were 
thinking entities who should remake society through the use of reason.  
Habermas, regardless of what one may think of his work, clearly outlines 
that for this to happen there has to be a sense of humanity or empathy 
between participants in a conversation.  If one believes in the premises 
of the Enlightenment then that person should be able to differentiate 
between disagreeing with another's views and caring about that person as 
a member of one's "society".

The early Frankfurt School writers didn't disagree with the ideas of 
early Enlightenment thinkers, but rather they saw how, in a dialectical 
sense, those ideas were "transformed" by social forces within society.  
They also believe that this narrowed view of Enlightenment reason, 
instrumental reason, was dysfunctional and alienated actors and they saw 
their role as creating a space where critique could arise.

If one truly believes in the Enlightenment's tenents then one must think 
and act as a member of a universal community.

Warmest regards,
Kerry