[lit-ideas] bad-not bad

  • From: Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: Lit-Ideas <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 19:15:34 -0400

ck: I wonder whether this doesn't come down to an emotional need to believe in the protective rationality of one's pater familias--versus, say, my emotional need to question the pater of my national familias, until he's forced to defend his capacities by showing them.


So what do we really know? Why condemn higher political skepticism? Just as easy to say that daddy-haters will take the same field day as good-daddy identifiers. Both, like Jung's alchemists, will project famously into that great blank tabula, coming up for air only to enjoin:

bad-not bad-bad-not bad-bad-not bad-bad-not bad-bad-not bad-bad-not bad-bad-not bad-bad-not bad-bad-not bad-bad-not bad-bad-not bad-bad-not bad-bad-not bad-bad ... yeah bad-not bad

[from the Times news feed]

Pentagon Memo Aims to Counter Rumsfeld Critics
By MARK MAZZETTI and JIM RUTENBERG
A one-page memo offers a direct challenge to the criticisms made by retired generals about Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/16/washington/16rumsfeld.html?th&emc=th

------------------------------------------------------------------
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:

  • » [lit-ideas] bad-not bad
  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 04-2006