<< To think that there is a "one right answer" to understandig the
>implications of thinking that mind is culturally mediated/consituted is
>like thinking that there is one best flavor of ice cream. Of course, its
>chocolate, but......
Does this mean that all implications that we draw are a matter of
personal taste, and so somehow equally valid? Or are some implications
somehow "more valid" than others? (sort of like George Orwell's "all
pigs are equal, but some are more equal than others"). If there are
in fact certain principles which many seem to agree upon, then perhaps
these act as parameters to the implications that can be drawn as well.
Or is it ultimately (as in the Orwell example) a "political" thing--
certain implications and/or opinions/preferences end up carrying more
weight among a group of peers because of the reputation(s) of the
person(s) espousing them. >>
I thnk there's a middle step here, between thinking that one set
of principles is right above all others, and thinking that all sets
are equally valid. The middle step has to do with the purposes of
each set, as displayed by the kinds of categories they construct,
the kinds of evidence that can be sorted into those categories,
and the kinds of reasonings that can be carried out using them.
Two (or more) sets of principles can be "both true" in this sense
but profoundly different in the ways they move from principle to
implication.
Helena Worthen