> On 3/1/09, Philip Pilkington <pilkingtonphil at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:05 AM, James Heartfield <
> > Heartfield at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Philkington:
> >>
> >> > I don't buy it. First off, in my opinion every
> >> > "psychological" reaction is
> >> > constituted or at very least given its meaning by some sort
> >> > of "social"
> >> > force.
> >>
> >> you will be saying God is real next
> >> ___________________________________
> >> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
> >
> >
> > That was a joke, right? My irony detector sometimes proves a little
> lacking
> > in sensitivity around here. Just to point out, if you weren't, one of the
> > first to come up with this idea was Nietzsche...
> > ___________________________________
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
>
> He _might_ be accusing you of uncritical social determinism, whereas
> we we enlightened contemporary people have recognized that
> such-and-such is biologically innate, et cetera.
>
> In any event, "or at very least given its meaning by" makes the
> statement trivially true, doesn't it? The meaning of everything is
> socially determined.
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
Yeah, of course, meaning is socially determined becuase its constituted through language and language is shared/social. I thought at least that was an "acceptable" position to hold.