There's a fine line between Philosophy and English Literature these
days (they're both big on Freud ;-).
Functionally, I'd call him a philosopher (he's a big fan of Sidney
Hook).
On Jan 19, 2009, at 12:25 PM, Ken Steele wrote:
Paul Brandon wrote:
I haven't read this article, but I do occasionally read him for
amusement.
He's a philosopher, which means that he doesn't feel any need to
tie his
statements to reality, and has no appreciation for systematic data
collection.
Internal consistency is all!
Sounds like he's talking about himself.
Fish's degree is in English and he is a prominent
deconstructionist. I think he would agree with Paul that he
doesn't feel any need to tie his statements to reality because he
questions the existence of "reality."
A famous story illustrates Fish's view:
"A simple illustration of interpretive communities is Fish's
story of baseball umpire Bill Klem, who once waited a long time
to call a particular pitch. "Well, is it a ball or strike," the
player asked impatiently. To which Klem replied, "Sonny, it ain't
nothing 'til I call it" - saying, in effect, that balls and
strikes are not facts in the world but "come into being only on
the call of an umpire." This example shows how his scholarship
questions our conventional assumptions about fairness, justice,
and truth."
from http://www.biographybase.com/biography/Fish_Stanley.html
But substitute "surgeon" for "umpire" and "liver" for "strike"
and "lung" for "ball." I'm glad Fish doesn't teach in a med school.
Paul Brandon
Emeritus Professor of Psychology
Minnesota State University, Mankato
[email protected]
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([email protected])
