In your letter to Bob you said
" I have only to reflect on the course of injustice in the world,
historically and now, to feel that this phenomenon is amply
illustrated. This is what allows terrorists to operate, misogynists
to oppress, abusers to victimize, etc. They don't see , and they
don't see that they don't see. Instead, they think they do see, and
rightly".
This a good example of my argument that assumptions of language as
transparent are dangerous where issues of power and values are
hidden - see my previous posting.
You also said
" Reluctantly, I am coming to the tentative conclusion that many of us have
unwittingly embraced a paradigm-become-religion. Instead of honoring the
spirit of the founder, and kapt alive a rigorous search for truth, we
have instead slipped into the conviction that we have found truth. " .
This is a fair warning - I project it back to you as a scholarly
question about your classifying several of my statements as
'objectivism". Are you not also in danger of putting a paradigm faith in
your construct of living in language when you challenge others who
argue the fragility of language as a form of communication.
Wendy Crebbin
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%