It's really fun to be outside the box.
It's amazing how some people DO get exercised.
Could we call it mental aerobics?
Having spent some 40 odd years on the teaching side of
academia, in several different places, not to mention the
previous 10 or so years in the graduate student angle of
things, I can't agree on the attributions to my cloth. But
what the hay, at least I'm not a man of the cloth.
Carrol Cox wrote:
>CR Mittal wrote:
>>This is a P.S. to the two observations, one by Owen Barfield and the
>>other by Eliot himself.
>>that absurdity is perpetrated ALL the time by many in power in academia.
>This is simply not true -- Peter has made it up out of whole cloth, as
>is revealed by the intellectual limpness of the retreat to a vague and
>unspecifiable "many." Since Peter has no evidence for the claim, I see
>no reason to go beyond a simple flat rejection of it.
>And of course it has utterly no relevance (even if it were true) to the
>discussion on this list.
>Peter's mode of discourse reminds me of two other groups who specialize
>(quite sincerely though ignorantly) in disrupting rational conversation:
>creationists in the realm of science education, conspiracy theorists in
>the realm of left politics. In fact Peter's mode of reasoning is
>amazingly similar to those who argue that 9/11 was a plot of the Bush
>administration. Since the Bush administration's _reaction_ to 9/11 was
>to declare war on the human species, one can establish the criminality
>of the invasions of Afghanistan & Iraq using material from the front
>pages of the NYT, and the nonsense spewed by the conspiracists merely
>interferes with organizing against the war. Similarly, Peter's creation
>of academics conspiring to corrupt the young mind simply creates chaos
>in the discussion of the scope and limits (and there are _real_ limits)
>in the construal of authoriao meaning.
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.14/48 - Release Date: 7/13/2005