Hi Paul, I understand! L*
>Leigh,
>
>
>as to the lost messages, mike succinctly stated part of what I had to say
>about the kathie's dualistic scheme (oh no, no more wizard stories!). I
>also noted how kathie links the different oppositions into a system, in some
>respects similar to the ancient chinese yin-yang structure except that here
>the yang principle is seen to be the source of silencing, domination, etc
>and also forms the basis of an categorical framework that structures
>interactive outcomes, a structuration that conceals itself through
>ascribing the outcomes to the presence of the yang attributes.
>
>i also meant to tell Eva that I have no formal western philosophical
>training, although a lot of times it's hard to draw the line when doing
>social theory--i did have classes on foucault and derrida in 1978 and
>undergrad philosophy classes. My
>formal training is anthropology, latin american studies, and regional
>planning. I just happened to like reading philosophy, a habit that I've
>never quite outgrown in spite of formal zen training in letting the mental
>babble subside . But as rachel says, the poles of these oppositions
>constantly change into each other . . .
>
>paul
>
______________________________________________
Susan Leigh Star, Professor
Department of Communication
9500 Gilman Drive
University of California at San Diego
La Jolla, CA 92093-0503
lstar@ucsd.edu http://weber.ucsd.edu/~lstar/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 07 2000 - 17:54:01 PST