jim clark wrote:
> epistemologies, which are of course equally valid means of
> understanding, as the numerous critical disciplines have made
> abundantly clear in their radical, constructivist transformation
> of academia. ... Umh, perhaps I have been reading too much of
> this stuff ... it sure flows and is a lot easier than making
> sound arguments!
Obviously Jim was being sarcastic, which leaves me to believe that
he doesn't understand the postmodern critiques of scientific methods as well
as he would if he were, say, a woman or a member of a racial minority.
People like Jim lack a certain kind of intelligence - call it "irrational
intelligence" - because of his narrow European background. Of course, I have
the same kind of background, but because I live in a multicultural part of
my town and I'm descended from members of a disadvantaged group (my mother
was a woman), some "deconstructive intelligence", "invalid inference
intelligence", and "tolerance for logical contradiction intelligence" have
apparently rubbed off on me.
Paul Smith
Alverno College
Milwaukee
