Thread: People's vocabularies.
View Single Post
Old 01.21.2009, 02:42 PM   #61
!@#$%!
invito al cielo
 
!@#$%!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: mars attacks
Posts: 42,729
!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glice
The problem is the logical corrolaries - YES, there are some sections of academia that are not concerned with verificationist schemas. Can you draw a broader conclusion about a whacking great slew of acadmia, including many diverse individuals, on the basis of one magazine? It seems to me like the magazine was looking for good, provocative copy, not something (yawn) academically rigorous.

My understanding of the affair is that he's highlighted some gaps in a flawed, incomplete system and drawn conclusions to the effect that all of that system is flawed. Bad logic.

Anything that threatens to apply an alien logic to Derrida is going to have a hard time, methinks.

but i think the system is fundamentally flawed, regardless of well-meaning individuals. flawed, fucked, broken, gone astray and fallen into a craphole.

may jeebus save us.
!@#$%! is offline   |QUOTE AND REPLY|