While searching back on list postings, I came across this one by Jay. It=
relates to something Gary has alluded to, and to what Nate and I exchanged=
about the quantitative aspects of Eva's paper, and can be placed in=
contrast. To be brief, only a part of Jay's posting is included, but the=
date and time are noted to make it easier to find.
B
At 8:32 PM -0500 11/14/97, Jay Lemke wrote:
Re: narrators and quantifiers
=2E..
>When Gary Shank points to the deeper philosophical differences between the
>Schools, he is not, presumably denying that both quantitative and
>qualitative differences are useful and related, even complementary, kinds
>of meanings to make (surely Peirce thought so). And when David Dirlam and
>others argue that quantitative analysis ought to have a useful place in the
>New School, they are not, presumably, denying that they were in many ways
>fundamentally misused under the theoretical and philosophical assumptions
>defining the Old School. The problem is not with quantity but with its
>fetishism in the service of a fantasy of universal, context-independent
>accounts of meaning-based systems. A fantasy with historical roots (often
>merely contingent ones) in many kinds of interests from those of patriarchy
>to those of capitalism and technocracy.
>
Bill Barowy, Associate Professor
Lesley College, 31 Everett Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-2790=20
Phone: 617-349-8168 / Fax: 617-349-8169
http://www.lesley.edu/faculty/wbarowy/Barowy.html
_______________________
"One of life's quiet excitements is to stand somewhat apart from yourself
and watch yourself softly become the author of something beautiful."
[Norman Maclean in "A river runs through it."]