critical-realism
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]
Date:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Thread:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Index:  [ Author  | Date  | Thread  ]

Re: BHA: RE: Re: what's next

any consensus on how to proceede?

Archer?

DPF?

DPF and Archer?

Hegel, Marx and DPF?



 

>From: Phil Walden
>Reply-To: bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>To: bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: BHA: RE: Re: what's next
>Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 16:32:06 -0000
>
>Caroline, Mervyn,
>
>Caroline, what is the 'key concepts' approach?
>
>Mervyn, I suggest a discussion of whether Bhaskar's approach to dialectics
>squares with that of Hegel (in the SCIENCE OF LOGIC) and that of Marx
>(outlined in GRUNDRISSE), and if not why are the dialectics of these great
>thinkers not commensurate? That should get to the nub of things. It would
>certainly lead to an answer to Ruth's question about the relationship
>between materialism and critical realism.
>
>Am I the only lister who finds the (non)-debate between social
>constructionism and "realism" extremely artificial? It seems to be a way of
>avoiding dialectics altogether. How, Mervyn, is Archer "beginning to nibble
>at dialectics"? If somebody who wants to discuss Archer's book could briefly
>outline how they think it is relevant to an assessment of Bhaskar's
>DIALECTIC, I for one would be grateful.
>
>Phil Walden
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Caroline
> > New
> > Sent: 24 January 2001 11:59
> > To: bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: BHA: Re: what's next
> >
> >
> > Ruth asks for lurkers to come out. I would like a group reading of 'Being
> > Human', and then go back to DPF, using the 'key concepts' (!) approach.
> > Caroline
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mervyn Hartwig"
> > To:
> > Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 5:30 PM
> > Subject: BHA: what's next
> >
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Ruth wrote:
> > > >what in the bejeezis are we going to do about breathing
> > > >some life back into our extremely quiet list?! A good healthy
> > discussion
> > > >about whether one can be a critical realist but not be a
> > materialist? A
> > > >return to RTS? Or DPF? Something else? PON? Any ideas? Any takers?
> > >
> > > I suggest a reading and discussion of:
> > >
> > > Margaret S. Archer, Being Human: the Problem of Agency. Cambridge
> > > University Press, 2000. 323pp paperback 0 521 79564 8
> > >
> > > The third in a trilogy, this deals with the agential basis of her social
> > > theory. It is a big book in more than one sense, one that any (D)CR
> > > person will need to read no matter what their particular focus. This is
> > > what the blurb says:
> > >
> > > 'Humanity and the very notion of the human subject are under threat from
> > > postmodernist thinking which has declared not only the 'Death of God'
> > > but also the 'Death of Man'. This book is a revindication of the concept
> > > of humanity, rejecting contemporary social theory that seeks to diminish
> > > human properties and powers. Archer argues that being human depends on
> > > an interaction with the real world in which practice takes primacy over
> > > language in the emergence of human self-consciousness, thought,
> > > emotionality and personal identity - all of which are prior to, and
> > > more basic than, our acquisition of a social identity.'
> > >
> > > *Being Human* strikes some mighty blows against subjective (linguistic)
> > > idealism and social constructionism and would provide a platform for
> > > discussing just about anything within the (D)CR canon. Notwithstanding
> > > its appropriation of some marxist concepts (including 'the primacy of
> > > practice') I think the book is ultimately profoundly liberal in its
> > > worldview and helps to provide a window on the soul of the later
> > > Bhaskar.
> > >
> > > 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...
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, I don't know the price of the book but it shouldn't be
> > > too much, being a paperback. We'd have to wait a bit for people to get
> > > copies... If listers wanted a more detailed idea of contents before
> > > deciding, I could provide that.
> > >
> > > Mervyn
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- from list bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- from list bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
> >
>
>
>
> --- from list bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

--- from list bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
[ Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]