Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 18:04:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gary E Davis <gedavis1-AT-yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: HAB: re: Ken on moral psychoanalysis



--- Kenneth MacKendrick <kenneth.mackendrick-AT-utoronto.ca> wrote:

> At 12:35 PM 9/25/01 -0700, you wrote:
> 
> >[G] No, Ken, I *am* disputing the validity of reading Habermas's
> >moral discourse psychoanalytically. I'm disputing the hermeneutic,
> >not your choice of terms within that rejected approach to
> >interpretation.
> >
> >Psychoanalytic reading of Habermas's discourse just doesn't work.
> 
> Funny though. Every single orthodox Marxist, Hegelian, Kantian,
> Freudian 
> Weberian, FSer, Meadian, Rawlsian and etc. has argued the *exact*
> same 
> thing about a communicative reading of XYZ's work...

A great consensus on the failure of  psychoanalytic reading? Part of
your realm in which Hegel doesn't find Habermasian readings credible
(you indicated last week).  

> 
> I guess I'll just have to write my own factory. 
> 

Happy productionism.

G


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com


     --- from list habermas-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---