14.0052 non-mainstream

From: Humanist Discussion Group (willard@lists.village.virginia.edu)
Date: Fri Jun 02 2000 - 19:46:21 CUT

  • Next message: Humanist Discussion Group: "14.0050 EduPage on computer games for kids"

                    Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 14, No. 52.
           Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London

       [1] From: "Osher Doctorow" <osher@ix.netcom.com> (29)
             Subject: Re: 14.0048 non-mainstream

       [2] From: "Osher Doctorow" <osher@ix.netcom.com> (14)
             Subject: Re: 14.0048 non-mainstream

             Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:43:07 +0100
             From: "Osher Doctorow" <osher@ix.netcom.com>
             Subject: Re: 14.0048 non-mainstream

    From: Osher Doctorow osher@ix.netcom.com, Thurs., June 1, 2000, 6:54AM

    Dear Colleagues:

    Patrick Rourke is correct concerning the "mutual agreement" between Isaac
    Asimov and his university to discontinue their relationship. I was aware of
    this, but I think that it merits intensive analysis. A person of Asimov's
    genius does not come along every day, to understate my case. If Princeton's
    Institute for Advanced Study can retain "non-producers" on their list as a
    matter of course, with mutual consent, then we are reminded perhaps of what
    we all know, namely, that it benefits both the faculty member and the
    university to retain a genius on the staff both for his/her contributions to
    knowledge and for the financial benefits to the faculty member. It is also
    common to refer to "mutual consent" in divorce proceedings, especially in
    the USA, and these are far from friendly dissolutions usually.

    Concerning whether Socrates was a populizer or "intellectual oligarch" as
    Plato and Patrick Rourke (with qualifications) claim, I am aware that
    Socrates should be classified as one able to teach a specific technique (the
    essence of logic-science, in fact) rather than an evangelist in the
    religious sense. However, the picture is similar to that of Jesus Christ in
    many ways (if I may venture outside the mainstream of philosophy). Jesus
    was certainly teaching a specific technique (faith and "higher love" and
    morality/ethics), but how many of us teach our specific techniques without
    the inner hope that it will "catch on" or appeal to the public, so to speak?
    I merely claim that Socrates was a non-mainstreamer but also a "man for all
    seasons," with universal appeal across the ages for those with more creative
    and dicriminating abilities.

    I have Socrates on the Brain in the sense of supporting the Non-Mainstream.

    Yours truly and non-mainstreamably,


             Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:43:34 +0100
             From: "Osher Doctorow" <osher@ix.netcom.com>
             Subject: Re: 14.0048 non-mainstream

    From: Osher Doctorow osher@ix.netcom.com, June 1, 2000, 9:08AM

    Dear Colleagues:

    In reply to Patrick Rourke's interesting observation that the difficulty
    will be in making sure that a non-mainstream journal does not become a
    mainstream one, I am inclined to agree with Willard McCarty (at least, as I
    interpret his recent comments) that the Humanist Discussion Group (perhaps
    eventually the Humanist-Scientist Discussion Group?) itself may be the
    answer. I think that this discussion group is an ideal substitute for
    mainstream journals, or perhaps more accurately an ideal supplement to
    mainstream journals. Perhaps the difficulty in the USA is convincing the
    mainstream "powers that be" of this fact - a problem that extends across
    academia to government and industry (in the latter two, mainstream engineers
    for example have an incredibly strong influence).



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 02 2000 - 19:51:34 CUT