>Anyway, I think this ACTIVE body could be the link between future CHAT and
>future phenomenology, provided that it is not a glorified body, the body of
>a saint, but one for-the-better-and-worse.
Eva, can you say more about the active body that could link the CHAT
perspective with the (analytically speaking) more "inside-out" [??]
phenomenological perspective? These are interests that I & others
share, I think. I have approached them indirectly, via some literature in
medical anthropology, which offers one way of combining "experience-near"
accounts with more generalizable/empirically tested accounts [&, at its best,
historicizes the whole kaboodle]. I have read only teeny bits of
phenomenology (from Gadamer; Ricouer), so I am not at all sure how
your vision of linkages between PH. & CHAT relates to my conerns. Could
you say, for instance, how you see the limitations of CHAT for your own
work (I haven't read your diss yet) & what more you would like a
theoretical perspective to afford?
- Judy
vulnerable, worrying, responding-to-others, ACTIVE body.
....................
Judy Diamondstone diamonju who-is-at rci.rutgers.edu
Graduate School of Education Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey
10 Seminary Place New Brunswick, NJ 08903
Eternity is in love with the productions of time - Wm. Blake