Dick Grippon wrote:
>
> sheeeeeeeeeeeeit. I was involved in two community research programs. teams
> of researchers crawling all over said community. on one, the director of
> the research program was a high-minded intellectual type. we spent two
> years asking, "what is a community?" and once you answer that question,
> "how, exactly, do you study it in good faith?". there's no clear cut
> answer, but one thing: simply pointing out disagreements within a so-called
> community isn't enough to claim there's no such thing. to have a
> disagreement at all pressupposes that something is shared among those who
> disagree. and there, you have a place to start. community are imaginary.
> and there's nothing wrong with that. you, of all people, should appreciate
> that.
Doug's critique is weak because he chose the wrong metaphor. "Mush" won't hold up. The cliche he wants is "blank check," i.e. a term which is empty until used in a specfic or specifiable context with defined application. All the complaints about the word are more or less valid but can't offer a sensible explanation of why, despite these problems, the word remains irreplaceable.
Carrol