Re: BHA: what's next

[Jan Straathof <janstr@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Mervyn, you wrote:

>Our DPF reading clearly got somewhat bogged down. I think we should put
>it aside for a time - for dipping into now that we've digested a goodly
>chunk of it, rather than wading through - and focus on material that
>listers find more digestible. All the issues raised by the Bhaskarian
>canon could still be brought up. Though I think operating predominantly
>within the analytical problematic, Archer is beginning to nibble at
>dialectics...

well, i'll agree and follow all CR etc. reading proposals, but
my favorite would be to continue with DPF in some form or
another; maybe we could change our didactical approach sofar,
thus in stead of reading chronologically we/some could choose
a particular theme, phrase or insight and do some critiqueing and
commenting on it: there is soo much praxis (hidden) in DPF imho ?

yours,
Jan




     --- from list bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---