[lit-ideas] Re: SOS - Colin Morris and Taylor

On 5/19/06, Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
So I

strongly doubt that a simple dychotomy between
"modern" and "pre-modern" self is sustainable.
It seems to me that talking about "the modern self"
without any attempt at definition risks potentially
opening the way to just such simplifications.


Sorry if this sounds grumpy, but I'd rather hoped for a discussion
free of the usual "How is that defined?" and "If it isn't perfect,
it's not worth paying attention to" variety of cheap shots.

Of course Taylor's traditional/modern distinction isn't sustainable as
universal proposition. As my daughter would say, "No duh."  Neither
is classical mechanics. Which doesn't make Newtonian physics unworthy
of attention. Our mission is first to understand how Taylor develops
his argument. There will be plenty of time to argue whether or not to
accept it--once we have given it the respectful hearing it is due.

John (in a curmudgeonly mood)

--
John McCreery
The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN

US CITIZEN ABROAD?
THROW THE RASCALS OUT!
Register to Vote in '06 Elections
www.VoteFromAbroad.org
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: