ECSEDY Áron wrote: > My example was definitely not about astronomy. It was about beliefs. It > was about a dogmatized, majority belief that held on for centuries, and > the recognition of the errors in this belief by a minority. It was about > a few people who started to think differently instead of continuing the > tradition and who's ideas were rejected, but later vindicated. > The difference here is that astronomy is a topic where there is a clear objective truth, while the question of whether "Nuevo" is a style or purely a method of teaching is a human construct, with no objective reality beyond usage. > Obviously, I do not think I am anywhere near Galileo, but I wanted to > underline that just because a lot of people in the list had been taught > as Sergio suggested, to artificially classify dancing into THESE three > styles, instead of finding some other, more tangible descriptions, the > concept maybe wrong altogether. > Conversely, just because some people said that Nuevo was a teaching method and not a style does not mean that there is not now an identifiable style which is called Nuevo, both by practitioners and non-practitioners.
Myk, in Canberra _______________________________________________ Tango-L mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/tango-l
