Sorry Angel and Eva, but both of you kinda missed the point of my last
posting. I'm afraid it was a little too half-baked for it's own good,
but just in case other folks were confused.
Re: cultural vs human rights.
I did not pick some arbitrary culture. I *VERY CAREFULLY* chose Muslim
fundamentalism. Why? because it fit the characteristics that I sought in
my argument. I made no claims about other non-western cultures apposing
human rights. Also, I didn't seek to devalue either the goal of women
liberation or cultural autonomy. That would have defeated my purpose. I
deliberately chose two accepted, worthwhile, moral goals so that I could
produce a contradiction (on my way to a "reductio ad absurdum.") The key
to good philosophy is picking your examples carefully!! :-)
Re: Post-modernism vs Relativism.
I did *NOT* make the claim that post-modernism == relativism. I *DID*
make the claim that If post-modernism does not reduce to relativism, it
cannot rely solely on historically embedded practices to avoid the reduction.
My intention was not to resolve the question whether or not
post-modernist perspectives are amount to relativism. All I wanted to do
was problematize history as it could be employed in socio-cultural theory.
I do want to encourage the group to be more critical about how history
enters into our theories. The concern in a nutshell is simply this: "If
history can be too easily rewritten, then it serves not as an anchor to
socio-cultural theory, but a loop-hole." My concerns about
"practice-museums" is an attempt to tighten up that loop-hole.
Edouard
. - - - . . . - - - . . . - - - . . . - - - . . . - - - .
: Edouard Lagache :
: lagache who-is-at violet.berkeley.edu :
:..................................................................:
: In my experience I know of one universal truth: :
: All speakers seek to express one universal truth - theirs. :
: :
:
: Edouard Lagache, Nov-95 :
. - - - . . . - - - . . . - - - . . . - - - . . . - - - .