>>> Why ,then, did they do it? Segerstrale comes up with the
cleverest part of the book, the late Pierre Bourdieu's conception of
"moral capital". The critics wanted "moral capital" to help with their
personal struggles in academe for greater economic rewards and public
recognition as staunch anti-racists and egalitarians.<<<

I'd add to Sam's perceptive comments on this issue that the question "Why
then did they do it?" presupposes that they did, in fact, do it.  I'd
certainly not claim to have done vast amounts of rigorous sociological
research into this one, but I've done a fair bit of digging about in the
annals of the Sociobiology Wars for various purposes, and as far as I can
tell, the Lewontin/Rose axis were by no means the biggest noisemakers.  They
tended to make their attacks in the New York Review of Books, but that's not
exactly the world's most prominent forum.  The debate only went big-time
when it was picked up on by more mainstream media, and in general, the
newspaper stories tended to be triggered by Dawkins et al complaining that
the politically correct thugs were oppressing them by giving their books
shitty reviews in the NYRB.  I doubt I'll ever have time or resource to
prove this point, but I think it could be supported.

dd


___________________________________________________
Email Disclaimer

This communication is for the attention of the
named recipient only and should not be passed
on to any other person. Information relating to
any company or security, is for information
purposes only and should not be interpreted as
a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security.
The information on which this communication is based
has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable,
but we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness.
All expressions of opinion are subject to change
without notice.  All e-mail messages, and associated attachments,
are subject to interception and monitoring for lawful business purposes.
___________________________________________________

Reply via email to