The way I see it, a few people seem to assume
to know what I'm saying without actually reading it...
It is a bit like my poor mother-in-law, who rather than trying
to understend my poor English, tried to guess what this
wierd foreign girl would might want to say...
Eva
> "FOR EXAMPLE, I think that underneath the discussion, disagreement,
> and (occassional) incomprehension between Jay, Eva, and Ray, what
> is at issue is a view of human nature (gasp!) and what is possible
> for humans. Jay's view seems to hinge importantly on biological
> necessity -- our evolutionary legacy -- which he sees, I think, as
> fundamentally unalterable. With some justification, Eva sees these
> assumptions as essentially false (because too reductive) and
> distressingly self-fulfilling -- if we BELIEVE that we have no
> choice but to be agressively self-aggrandizing, then we have been
> given permission, as it were, to BE that way."
>
> Almost seems like a "tower of Babel" at times doesn't it? Might different
> language games be at play here? Or in the case of Ray, different forms of
> life?
> A student of Wittgenstein, Maurice Drury, wrote a book _The Danger of
> Words_. It explores much of what you comment on here.
>
>
>
>
> **************************************************
> * Brian McAndrews, Practicum Coordinator *
> * Faculty of Education, Queen's University *
> * Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 *
> * FAX:(613) 533-6307 Phone (613) 533-6000x74937*
> * e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
> * "The limits of our language means the limits *
> * of our world" Wittgenstein *
> * *
> * *
> **************************************************
>
>
>
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
