In a message dated 9/11/08 11:46:46 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> "We pretend that there's art and we pretend that there's illustration. We > can't think in any other way." > > Wrong. E,g, I don't think that way. > > This isn't what he meant. You are taking it literally as an expression of what he believes to be true. He meant it as an example. He could as easily have said that we pretend that there's peace and we pretend that there's war. Or we pretend that there's modern dance and we pretend that there's ballet. We made these categories up and now we put various events and objects into them. It is the discussion of one of the categories which is supposed to be the point of this list. If you are proposing that inventing the categories in the first place was a fundamental mistake, then you are denying a great deal of Western thought and I don't believe you. No one here supposes that there is a physical entity of peace or ballet or illustration. One cannot reify a category,that is not its purpose. Its purpose is to enable someone thinking about things to distinguish a group of things one is thinking about from some other things one is not thinking about. I suppose you will now attempt to play word games with "object" and "event" as contents of the categories. This is not a scholarly letter and you would do better to assume "category" a priori and further define what might be the contents and purpose of a category. Kate Sullivan ************** Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com. (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
