Date: Thu, 4 May 1995 17:46:55 -0600 (MDT)
From: leo meeks <lmeeks-AT-du.edu>
Subject: HAB: Re: Merger with frankfurt-school forum?


Spoon & List members,
i strongly suggest we keep the lists as they are unless this would pose a 
technical problem i am not aware of. to merge the lists would seem to me 
to create a totalization of knowledge concerning the f-school and 
habermas; i.e. it would seem to support the present contention by many 
american academics, who are notoriously bad readers, that habermas this 
the consummation of the tradition of critical theory. this is not to 
argue that the lists are unrelated, but that there is no identity 
justifying a merger.

-leo, back from the dead.



On Wed, 3 May 1995, Ermel Stepp wrote:

> As members of the habermas forum you need to be aware that the
> habermas forum may be merged into the frankfurt-school forum.  The 
> prospective merger has been discussed by the Spoon Collective, the
> sponsor of both lists.
> 
> Both lists have marginal traffic and the merger may stimulate more 
> discourse. We have experimented with the nesting of habermas within 
> the f-s, allowing the f-s subscribers to post to habermas by starting 
> their subject lines with HAB:. Recent comments from f-s are unamimous 
> in support of the connection of the two lists.
> 
> Now, we (spoons) propose a simple merger of habermas into the f-s list, 
> with the understanding that discourse about the ideas and works of 
> Jurgen Habermas will be fully acceptabe by f-s. Questions, though, have
> been asked about whether Jurgen Habermas is a critical theorist and 
> fits into the Frankfurt School as such. Five brief notes from that 
> discussion are appended for your information and comment, if you are 
> interested. Please comment on both the questions about Habermas and 
> the possible merger.
> 
> Unless we are persuaded otherwise by your comments, the habermas list 
> will be merged into the f-s list as soon as possible after
> Sunday, May 7, 1995.
> 
> Ermel Stepp
> Listowner, habermas
> 
> Message # 1:
> 
> Date: Sun, 19 Mar 1995 03:36:24 -0700 (MST)
> From: sm
> Subject: The Habermas, F/S Fold
> 
> Spooners:
> 
> I was persuaded by Leo's argument that Habermas is not a critical 
> theorist in the Frankfurt School tradition.  What this means, of course, 
> is that folding the Habermas List into F-S will not do.  So now what?  Do 
> we make a separate Hab list?  Do we fold the two together anyway?  Do we 
> axe the Hab list idea entirely?
> 
> Y in D,
> 
> Steve
> 
> Message # 2:
> 
> Date: Sun, 19 Mar 1995 07:03:07 -0700 (MST)
> From: lm
> Subject: Re: The Habermas, F/S Fold
> > Spooners:
> > 
> > I was persuaded by Leo's argument that Habermas is not a critical 
> > theorist in the Frankfurt School tradition.  What this means, of course, 
> > is that folding the Habermas List into F-S will not do.  So now what?  Do 
> > we make a separate Hab list?  Do we fold the two together anyway?  Do we 
> > axe the Hab list idea entirely?
> > 
> > Y in D,
> > 
> > Steve
> > 
> > 
> > 
> Spoon,
> i unfortunately was not persuaded by leo's argument. i think it is 
> alright to fold habermas into F-S because the question, at least 
> academically is still open. Perhaps the relation of habermas -- and let 
> me communicate this as clearly as possible -- to the frankfurt school 
> would make a good discussion on the list, a discussion on the list even.
> Having noted that let me say i think the relation between habermas' work 
> and the F-S problematizes the place of critique in modern society: what 
> is a critical theory which enfolds all  discourse; and what does this say 
> for critique? this is another aspect, one which habermas can't raise 
> because it imputes his position, to habermas' critique of foucault, 
> derrida and adorno vis a vis nietzsche.  
> 
> -leo, who is actually pursuaded by his own argument which never meant 
> that habermas should not be incorporated into the F-S list and thinks 
> that those little phrases which come after some people's names suggests 
> an author a bit more than is necessary; yet, is not a derridaean (yeah, 
> right).
> 
> Message # 3:
> 
> Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1995 00:28:20 -0500 (EST)
> From: ma
> Subject: Re:  The Habermas, F/S Fold
> 
> I think we should leave the decision to Ermel.  If he wants, we'll create
> a separate Habermas list; otherwise -- since Leo is not opposed to folding
> -- we'll fold.  It should be up to him, in my opinion.
> 
> - malgosia
> 
> Message # 4:
> 
> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 12:55:29 -0500 (EST)
> From: ma
> Subject: Re: nested lists
> 
> > My reaction is to create the habermas list, and, then, experiment
> > with the nesting alias for brief time to test see its usefulness
> > and acceptability. The nesting feature could be stimulating to each 
> > list, but the reaction of some subscribers could be negative, of 
> > course. Could the nesting mechanism be activated when wanted on 
> > special occasions for inter-list dialogue on selected topics?
> 
> OK, I'll create the habermas list some time between today and
> tomorrow.  Then, if Leo agrees to all this, I'll set up the aliasing
> so as to achieve the nesting, and we can announce this as an
> experiment on both lists -- on habermas it could be done within the 
> "we have moved" announcement.  I don't think the activation-deactivation
> of this will be difficult once we have learned how to make it work. 
> 
> -m 
> 
> Message # 5:
> 
> Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 17:16:50 -0700 (MST)
> From: lm
> Subject: Re: nested lists
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, 24 Mar 1995, Ermel Stepp wrote:
> 
> > Malgosia said:
> > 
> > >Now that I understand the list-related alias mechanism, it seems to
> > >me that one could set up some form of nested lists: where posts from
> > >a smaller list go both to _it_ and to some larger list, so that
> > >people with more narrow interests and people with wider interests
> > >can participate in the smaller list from different perspectives.
> > >I am not sure how flexible the automatic reply mechanism is, but
> > >this would become clear with a little experimentation.  So what I
> > >want to ask you is whether you'd be interested in using this for
> > >the habermas/frankfurt-school combo.  We would have two separate lists,
> > >but all the habermas posts would also go to f-s; we could configure
> > >habermas so that it's posts would have an identifying marker in
> > >the header -- thus f-s people who hate H could simply delete those without
> > >reading.  Does this sound worth pursuing?
> > 
> > >-m
> > 
> > My reaction is to create the habermas list, and, then, experiment
> > with the nesting alias for a brief time to test its usefulness
> > and acceptability. The nesting feature could be stimulating to each 
> > list, but the reaction of some subscribers could be negative, of 
> > course. Could the nesting mechanism be activated when wanted on 
> > special occasions for inter-list dialogue on selected topics?
> > 
> > Ermel
> > 
> > 
> Ermel,
> 
> i know this has come a bit too late, doesnt the messiah always -- it is 
> not to me i refer but the writing, the Word, if you will -- but i really 
> think the possibility of actually doing things with the f-s|habermas 
> list[s] could hinge on the merger -- to invoke massumi's slam,   
> "Prussian Mind Meld" -- those persons, like myself who cannot stand 
> habermas or his communicative ethic or the ideal speech situation could 
> spar with other more traditional frankfurters concerning this question. 
> It could be interesting, perhaps fun. 
> 
> -leo
> 
>