I'd like to place a marker on this discussion, to return later. I had
started reading Giddens "constitution..." just before aera, and having put it
on hold for a bit, i do not (yet) get the sense of his claiming a strong
inseparability therein. But perhaps with further reading... who knows? All
i can say is that Giddens make a lot of sense so far. Will that make me an
inseparabilitist? Eeek. Maybe I'm an "-ist" while trying not to be.
The problem being that while it would be great to contribute to a discussion
of Keith's papers, some additional preparation is necessary (for me anyway).
But (shooting from the hip, in lieu of required reading) one wonders whether
this strong/weak coupling is a matter of which activity one has in mind. Why
should it be fixed that the social/cultural determination of the individual
is independent of context? Why should we argue this without a particular
grounded situation in mind?
The bottom line is that i find myself (yet again) not rejecting the
conclusions of the unresolved tensions paper -- so there is bit of a puzzle i
still need to resolve.
bb
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 01 2002 - 01:00:07 PDT