By Peter Ekegren
Because the structuralist debates of the Nineteen Seventies the sector of textual research has principally remained the look after of literary theorists. Social scientists, whereas accepting that remark is concept encumbered have tended to take the that means of texts as given and to provide an explanation for modifications of interpretation both by way of lack of information or bias. during this very important contribution to methodological debate, Peter Ekegren makes use of advancements inside literary feedback, philosophy and important idea to reclaim this examine for the social sciences and to light up the ways that diversified readings of a unmarried textual content are created and defended.
Read Online or Download The Reading of Theoretical Texts PDF
Similar other social sciences books
Dominación y desigualdad: el dilema social latinoamericano
Libertad de agrupación. / Modos de escogencia y categorización. / Gestión y patrimonio. / Industria gráfica. / Cultura del cartel. / Del diseño y del diseñador. / Gráfica de autor. / Ser en los angeles academia.
- Men and Masculinities Around the World: Transforming Men's Practices
- Radical Philosophy #163
- The Ethics Pt 1 - Concerning God
- Current Issues in Philosophy of Mind (Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements; 43)
- The Catagories
Additional info for The Reading of Theoretical Texts
Example text
It cannot even be said that it has a preferred object of study. (White, 1985d:261) The social sciences and criticism 21 However, it should be observed that this ‘imperialistic’ move can be considered from another point of view, not contradicting these complaints but rather supplementing them. , for example, Pêcheux, 1982:55). But the problem of reading is two problems, actually. The first concerns the hows and whys of different modes of reading, how to explain them. e. how to avoid relativism in critical activity, how to avoid getting stuck in a position where ‘the critic, like the writer, never has the last word’ (Barthes, 1972a:xii).
Change their meaning according to the positions held by those who use them, which signifies that they find their meaning by reference to those positions… (Pêcheux, 1982:111) And even if it would be the case that my position was close to that of some of the theorists below, the respective positions would not be identical. This is, of course, what happens in every ‘eclectic’ undertaking, although the distortions may be more or less insulting to the (unknowing) lender. Now, ‘criticism’, notes Pierre Macherey, is an ambiguous term.
Fish, 1980g:68, italics mine) However, this view is not uncontested. So, for example, argues the philosopher and theoretical physicist Mario Bunge that there is such a thing as unsuccessful theories and, moreover, that these show the existence of something ‘out there’: HYLAS: This lack of complete overlapping or harmony between thoughts and things; this fact that disagreement between thinking and its objects is more frequent than the corresponding agreement, suffices to prove that thought is not the same as matter.
