typo. the same reason why, when I intend to write "we'll get the key and then we're going to the store" it'll come out as "willing get the key". My mind is thinking ahead to the word "going" while I'm still intending to type "we'll". voila: we'll + going = willing.
I haven't yet figured out why I've typed "spreadshit" way too many times at work.
But yeah, as Tahir has said, there's a sense of the word "practice" (and it depends on the tradition if they use "praxis" this way or not) that is much bigger than specific political practice where one consciously engages in action to change something. That's the sociology talking - for me: a tradition in the discipline that harkens back to Aristotelian understandings of practice as a way of life - what some might call habitus, others simply culture, etc. So, you might speak of the "norms and practices" involved in, say, the work of welders or lawyers. When I'm being more careful or when I think it matters to participants in the convo, I'll type "political practice" to signal that I recognize that some in the conversation of a commitment to a broader understanding of "practice" as a kind of everyday life practice as opposed to specific political practice. Not sure about Tahir's usage. *BTW, welcome back TW!
speaking of which, I've had to do this in the past with carrol who, when we first used to engage on the list, didn't always understand where I was coming from using a broader conception of practice.
but now you've gone and done it, making me think I might ought to revisit my books and papers which are all still packed away in the attic b/c I still have to paint before the bookshelves go up. Come on spring weather!
At 12:27 AM 1/27/2012, Chris Sturr wrote:
>shag: "As for the question: sure it makes sense. I mean, in the above set
>of thinkers, they all see theory and practice as related."
>
>But what you said earlier was about how theory and *praxis* are related,
>not how theory and *practice* are related: "I was a student of what is
>called the "philosophy of praxis" - a tradition of scholarship that was
>absorbed with the questions: what is theory? what is praxis? what is the
>relationship between the two?" My only point was that if you were using
>"praxis" in Gramsci's sense [which I guess you weren't], it wouldn't make
>sense to ask what the relationship between theory and *praxis* is. But do
>any of these theorists use "praxis" as a synonym for "practice"?
>
>I'd forgotten that Alison Jagger used the term "praxis." And I still have
>Brian Fay's Critical Social Science on my shelf--I remember it being really
>good. But I think I overdosed on theory for a while--I'm not usually
>tempted to pick those books up these days.
>
>Carrol: I would also like to hear more about Ted Morgan's book (even its
>title would be helpful--I guess I could Google). Sorry also about your
>eyesight. I've got cataracts that keep getting worse, but I can only
>imagine how frustrating more serious eye problems would be.
>
>--
>--
>Chris Sturr
>Co-editor, *Dollars & Sense*
>29 Winter St.
>Boston, Mass. 02108
>phone: 617-447-2177, ext. 205
>fax: 617-447-2179
>email: sturr at dollarsandsense.org
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)