Just briefly on Intellectual Impostures etc:
I think the original article was a valuable contribution. I would define it
as satire rather than dishonesty. The good thing about satire is that it
has the unique ability to puncture over-inflated egos (cf: Chris Morris and
'Brass Eye'). What is more it generally cannot work without the
collaboration of the 'victims' - the original article would not have been
half so interesting if it had not been published by Social Text (or another
such journal). If the editors and referees had been half as clever and
insightful as they thought they were they would have spotted it, which is
half the point.
Finally... it's funny! (Well, I thought so). We have to laugh at ourselves
sometimes, and not get too over-earnest about the importance and value of
what we all do.
Intellectual Impostures itself contains some telling criticism of extreme
relativism, however it also has the tendency to go over the top and lump
many very considered writers in with the real culprits. They completely
misunderstand what Latour is trying to say for instance (but then I suppose
that is not difficult - I'm not always sure what he's saying either in
French or in English!). In addition, as a polemic, it has lost all the
humour of the original article. But still worth reading...
David.
____________________________________________________________________
David Wood
PhD Research Student ('Intelligence Sites in Rural North Yorkshire')
Centre for Rural Economy
Department of Agricultural Economics and Food Marketing
University of Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 7RU
0191 222 5305
[log in to unmask]
____________________________________________________________________
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|