Alright for the sake of clarity we can change ideological and political orientation to those biases that privilege one systemic conceptual framework over another Chair, Visual Arts and Technologies The Cleveland Institute of Art
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: <[email protected]> > Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 13:05:46 EDT > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: fuzzy > > In a message dated 7/13/08 10:29:21 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > >> The trouble with >> words like fuzzy in serious dialogue is that they >> carry a "virus" of sorts that denegrate whatever >> concept they are meant to describe. While it is >> alright in political language to use words that convey >> pejorative content along with descriptive meaning, it >> is not alright in serious philosophy which should, I >> believe, remain as neutral as possible in order to >> reveal or shape concepts. >> > > I think it's time for a new word-one with no overtones of the sort that > "fuzzy" now carries. Using a word a lot often results in not using it > carefully-instead of thinking of an appropriate word, one reaches for the > good old > standby, and the result is not as clear as one might think. > Kate Sullivan > > > ************** > Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and > the live music scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com! > > (http://www.tourtracker.com?NCID=aolmus00050000000112) > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean.
