I've started two new discussion groups (below). They'll be slow atfirst. I'd like to recruit some good people for them. Would beappreciative if you passed them along to graduate students and otherfaculty.
Two preliminaries. I started the groups because of the private mails Iget in response to my comments here and elsewhere. People seem to likeone-on-one's with me. Now, there is a forum for that. Feel free toparticipate anonymously if you like (some do that on my Wittgensteinsite).
The technology on the sites are pretty friendly. You don't have tojoin the group to participate. You can read them on the web at maydifferent places (yahoo, google, freelists, and the discussion board).The group comes in discussion-board format as well as email format --you can use either vehicle and never miss a message.
Here are the groups:
This group provides an intellectual critique of the American academy,and a discussion about American culture, value and politics. The groupis particularly harsh on what academics call "political science." Thissocial club is both more lost and irrelevant than it has ever been.Politics is more in the nature of an aesthetic than a science. Hence,the term "politicology" is offered as a substitute (cf. "sociology").In a sense, this group is about forming a new understanding of how tohave a bird's eye view of culture, politics, history and philosophy.The group shows how to become, teach and think like a politicologist.The essence is intellectual context, not information. And intellectualfreedom, rather than social-club norms. The group believes that theacademy in general, and American culture in particular, suffer fromthe samesorts of contemporary illnesses. The failings of the one relate to thefailings of the other.
SECOND GROUP: LAW AND META PERSPECTIVE
This group is devoted to ending the perspectival account of law (e.g.,"law and society") without resurrecting either strict objectivism orformalism. Instead, the goal is to attain "meta-perspective." The ideais simple: the thing that affords us perspective must, by necessity,also allow for meta-perspective, if we simply continue our quest tounderstand. Hence, a good account of law should involve all of the"perspectives" -- society, politics, economics, philosophy,literature, etc. A good legal scholar, therefore, should bemeta-perspectival. In essence, then, this group allows perspectivism(Nietzsche) to win the battle, but not the war.
Regards and thanks
Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.Assistant ProfessorWright State UniversityPersonal Website: http://seanwilson.orgSSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860New Discussion Groups! http://ludwig.squarespace.com/discussionfora/