Subject: Re: BHA: Transitive & intransitive
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 20:45:07 -0500


While generally I agree with Michael's account of science as transitive
vis-a-vis the objects of scientific study, if science is *itself* the object
of study (in, say, sociology of science, or even philosophy of science), does
it not therefore from that perspective become intransitive?  After all, we
can treat every other social practice as intransitive when it becomes an
object of study.  And as Michael emphasizes--as has Ruth, in a somewhat
different way--ideology contributes to the construction of social life (a
version of the "society is concept-dependent" thesis).  But if so, then
perhaps transitive/intransitive really is perspectival?

> p.s. I have no idea what to say to folks with a taste for Zizek.
> Carnap once posed the following question:  "How does one persuade
> a logical idiot?"  To which he offered this answer:  "You can't."
> I feel much the same about postmodernists of a certain stripe.

I hope this means I can continue to ignore Zizek completely?  (I feel pretty
confident he'll return the favor....)

Hope y'all had a nice holiday, you that had one.  (The RM conference ate most
of mine.)  Happy Kwanzaa.

---
Tobin Nellhaus
nellhaus-AT-gwi.net
"Faith requires us to be materialists without flinching": C.S. Peirce


     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---