Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 20:51:41 -0800 (PST)
Subject: HAB: Bob Scheetz (re: this month's "samizdat")



--- bob scheetz <rscheetz-AT-cboss.com> wrote:

>...would it be possible, in the ideal court of discourse ethics, to
entertain the righteousness of a 9/11 strategy?  

Would it be possible for you to interpret something in *terms of
Habermas's work* or to share your engagement with his work or foster
engagement?  Or is this just not possible for you?  

Show how your comment above is not about rationalizing pathological
violence.

Make a case, in terms of JH's work, one way or another, about
something specific. Or get specific about something in JH's work that
you want to understand--or share with others what is worth their
thinking about, in your view, relative to JH's work.  In all the
years of interaction here, is there nothing worth your participatory
follow-up? 

Why should one not see a posting from you as just something to delete
without reading? (I confess that I got to that point long ago, but
ventured to read your posting tonight, only to regret it, again).

Be constructive, please. Thank you.

Gary






__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com


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