"Violence" as a Useless Category, was Re: Just Wars

Yoshie Furuhashi furuhashi.1 at osu.edu
Mon May 14 00:34:13 PDT 2001

> > Ian Murray wrote:
> > > Having problems with the meanings of nominalism again Carrol :-)?
> >
>> Yup. I'm on a slippery slope I know. But in one of the Dialogues
>> Socrates compares a dialectician to a carver -- the good carver divides
>> the meat at the joints rather than splintering the bones. And I rather
>> think that "violence" as a category splinters a good number of bones and
>> misses a number of joints.
>> Carrol
>It's interesting how slippery slope "sorites" arguments took off in
>ethical discourse
>via Protagoras and his merry brand of pranxterz. The debate has been
>going on ever
>since with no let up in sight.
>The questions for our time aren't about carving that meat, it's
>about understanding
>how to create new forms of nourishment; a neo-Epicurean ecology of emotions,
>administrative competences, food systems, conflict resolution forums,
>architectures/homes that fuse living systems with "advanced" "forms"
>of "matter"
>etc......a happy type of microbial micropolitics based on a respect for the
>plasticity and incontinence of space-time and each other.

A "neo-Epicurean ecology" sounds vaguely benign (though I don't know what it actually means), but "administrative competences" & "conflict resolution forums" (especially when they come together in the age of multinational neo-colonialism, reminding me of East Timor for instance) sound unfortunately technocratic (though again I don't have a clue what concrete forms you think such ideas should take).


More information about the lbo-talk mailing list