|
|
we are all tarred w/rushtons brush
Gordon Roe Univ Western Ontario (ROE@SSCL.UWO.CA)
Thu, 20 Oct 1994 10:52:53 -0400
----- Begin message from SMTP%"U28550@UICVM.UIC.EDU" 19-Oct-94
From: SMTP%"U28550@UICVM.UIC.EDU" 19-OCT-1994 12:44
To: ROE
CC:
Subj: Re: Re: dumb dumb dumb
> This isn't separate from other threads. As a grad student in anthro at the sam
> univerrsity as Rushton, I am constantly encountering the supposition that he
> _is_ an anthropologist and this _is_ anthropology. At the busstop, in the
> dentist chair, at parties, the first thing people say (gaurdedly) is, "Oh,
> where Rushton is, eh".
> You wanna talk about hooks? How about that?
> We spend an awful lot of time on confronting and debunking his ideas in
> undergrad classes and it does offer us an excellent launching point for the
> dangers inherent in the intellectual history of our discipline.
> But to a lot of people it is anthropology. And isn't that our fault in not
> properly defining and advertising our discipline(s)?
> Gordon (roe@sscl.uwo.ca)
Yes indeed, it is very much of a problem and look who has the hooks. I would
like to see you repost this for the list, or at least send a copy of this to
John McCreery. People like El Jagoff are not the only ones appropriating
our core constructs and our methods, and we continue to marginalize ourselves.
Let's get back to hooks and do it right. Your note should kick it off. Thanks
for your time and thought.
Mike
----- End forwarded message
|