Dear Dan (and others)
Surely the more pressing question is why you feel that this distinction (between theory and philosophy) is of importance? Will this not eventually boil down to a certain inevitable historical statistics: if an article mentions more secondary sources which are generally listed under the category of "philosophy" (Kant, perhaps) then it must be "philosophy"...?
Why is this taxonomy interesting?
Cheers
David
-----Original Message-----
From: Film-Philosophy Salon on behalf of Shaw, Dan
Sent: Wed 24/05/2006 15:00
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Film Book Essentials
All that aside, my question still remains...what is the difference between film theory on the one hand and philosophy of film on the other?
Anyway, I'd love to hear more from other members of the salon on the subject, a defining one for our subdiscipline.
Daniel Shaw
Professor of Philosophy and Film
Lock Haven University
Managing Editor, Film and Philosophy
website: www.lhup.edu/dshaw
*
*
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
**
|