Science Shmience

[Bill Burns]

Whoops--too used to the mailer at work.


>
>Diana,
>
>I'm not suggesting that these binaries don't exist, in our cultural constructs.
>What I'm saying is that they may be defined as both positive and negative.
Your point on vulnerability is well taken, and I agree that acknowledging
one's vulnerabilities leads to a position of strength rather than weakness.
(Sun Tzu suggested this eons ago.) And, again, there's nothing wrong with
pointing them out. Recognition is part of the process of reclamation or
reconstruction. My problem is that regardless of whether "intuition" has
been regarded negatively by the patriarchy previous to Pynchon, Pynchon's
suggestion of the power of intuition (if that's what he's doing) does not
set him at odds with what feminists are saying; it simply sets up a parallel
(very possibly informed by the earlier feminist critique). 
>
>I'm going to inject an analogy here, not because it proves my point, but
because it may help me illustrate it. If I'm eating a meal at the local
Egyptian restaurant and say, "This dish has curry in it," my lunchmate does
not contradict me if he/she says, "Indian food has a lot of curry in it."
The two possibilities coexist and do not exclude the other. So Pynchon
suggests including intuitive means to gain knowledge. If feminists do too,
then it's a nice parallel, it could perhaps help elucidate the text, but it
is not contrary to anyone's purposes. Your original response said:
>
>    But intuition has been the devalued purview of the feminine since the
Enlightenment and before (Aristotle's Nicomachean ethics would of course
>    be a primary source for binary thought in Western epistemology and one
in which women fare quite badly).  
>
>This suggests, to me, that you sense some inconsistency here. My point is
he's deviating from the tradition of devaluating intuition. There isn't a
"but intuition has been the devalued..." here, but a "so intuition, which
has been the devalued..."  You see? It doesn't help us get to the bottom of
what Pynchon's doing; it simply introduces a parallel theme that could
elucidate the text. 
>
>So, if he is suggesting a move toward valuing intuition, is he moving away
from the old perspective toward an intergration of feminine and masculine
into one set of values, or is he simply co-opting the feminist perspective?
Was this the implication you were setting up here?
>
>
>
>
Bill Burns
WDBurns at micron.net
============================================================
  "One bad-hair day in the 13th century and 
   suddenly you've got horns." The Devil/*Drew Carey*
============================================================