Re: [-empyre-] a book, dna and code

["sdv@krokodile.co.uk" <sdv@krokodile.co.uk>]

How then would you understand the current condemnation of Watson ? On 
the one side condemned for racism and on the other for being a bad 
scientist.  Where is the ambiguity here ?

Curiously it reminds me of a statement of Chomsky's which argued that: 
even if it's proven that one group of people are more intelligent than 
another, this is of no more importance than if one person has green eyes 
and another brown eyes.

steve
Judith Roof wrote:

> Probably not.  In this view the real, whatever that is, is always  
> intricated with language and image.  Culture is no more "true" than  
> empiricism, but my point is even more introductory than that-- language 
> has a sneaky way of being ambiguous no matter what its  referent is.
>
> Judith