Nancy Gish wrote:
> Neither works if you try to follow it to any logical conclusion.
> But then, as I said, I discuss this in the article on
> "Subjectivities," which focuses on how Anglo-American and French
> theories are set down on a template like Scottish poetry where they
> just do not explain anything--one of them being these notions of
> discourse as either totally originated by the lyric voice or totally
> constructed by language. I never feel constrained by "either/or"; it
> is pretty much always a false dichotomy.
I had a friend who insisted that the meaning of either/or (in
Kierkegaard no less) was "take your pick" or "six of one, half a dozen
of the other"! False choices are false choices, between which one is not
constrained to choose. But without arriving, somewhat regularly, at true
either/or's, what progress does thought make?