Re: Limiting postings

Hello WSN,

This is the first time I am writting to the list. Please, excuse me if my
english isnŽt good enough. IŽll try to do my best.
Around the theory-practical diatribe, we have "The Innocent Anthropologist.
Notes from a Mud Hut" (London, 1983) written by Nigel Barley, an excelent
document where everyone can find interesting tools to work with myths around
"knowing by living/doing" (as Daniel Pineu said).

In my opinion, the most difficult task here, and also the most useful and
interesting, is being able to debate about World Systems (farther, maybe
"the World System") without mixing emotions, ideology, belief, prejudice and
anecdote. Are we really able to do it? Is it really necessary to use those
lenses to see and give a meaning to the matter we are trying to manage?

If we are not able to test "spotless" points of view (with or without
living/doing), we will be playing the favorite game of the system (also
entitled "the mushroom technique"): "keep them in the dark and feed them
with trash". The perfect strategy for nothing to change.


Best regards,

Silvia






----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Riesz <priesz@itn.cl>
To: <wsn@csf.colorado.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 1:01 PM
Subject: Limiting postings


> Answering my observations on "armchair experts", the opinion seems to
> prevail, that postings on this net should be limited to discussing the
> intricacies of the world system theory.
>
> On the other hand Adam Starr and I seem to feel, that it might often be
> wise to support theory with a minimum of personal experience, when
> discussing concrete problems currently afflicting our societies.
>
> Furthermore theories might often be improved and/or refined through
> listening to outsiders with such experience; in other words such
> postings should be welcomed and not belittled and contributors should at
> least be protected against attacks "ad personam".
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> Regards             Paul Riesz
>
>