Subject: Re: RE: psychoanalysis
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 17:46:48 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)



On 9 May 2000 19:37:05 -0000 dick gifford <dickgifford-AT-2hb.net> wrote:

> But who would get the idea to construe this vision as pathological?

Pathology is not registered in terms of the object (alone), rather the way in 
which we relate to the object(ive).

One another note - to those on the list interested...

I'm working on the distinctions between hermeneutics and critical theory. Is 
anyone up for a rather engaged conversation on the matter? Specifically I'm 
interested in the scientific claim that Habermas makes regarding the 
reconstructive sciences against Gadamer's hermeneutics. I can offer up a 
bibliography of resources I'm currently drawing from and field recommendations 
for what's missing.

ken