User talk:Executivezen

where to start
"I guess I'm just not sure where to start contributing." <-- Poststructuralism is a good start. I think Wikiversity would benefit from pages such as The first thing you should know about Poststructuralism. While that kind of introductory "lesson" might seem dull and boring to you, it might help start Wikiversity towards building a community of people who know what Poststructuralism is and why it is of interest. Frankly, I have twice read Post-structuralism and Structuralism and I have a several decades long standing interest in language, culture, and society, but I probably could not give a coherent description of what "structuralism" or "poststructuralism" is. As a scientist, I accept the idea that we should always be questioning our assumptions and how we came to know what we think we know. However, I am also a pragmatist. It is fine to question existing structures, but at the end of the day, if there is no alternative that works better, we just continue to make use of our old ways of doing things. It would be useful for someone like me if there was a list of what the major implications/accomplishments of "poststructuralism" have been. --JWSchmidt 21:59, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Poststructuralism 101 - ok
You've convinced me: I'll make a start on this at the Continental Philosophy section of the Philosophy School main page. I too have a deep interest in pragmatism (though I'm not a scientist), especially as an antidote to unnecessasry metaphysical speculations; though even such speculations I find interesting. I'm currently reading about the distinction between the thinking of Jacques Derrida and Richard Rorty; in particular, the affirmations each have for anti-foundationalism as well as the antagonisms each have with respect to the political utility of their respective approaches. But I'm at it already and will reserve an explaination for the forthcoming pages -- executivezen 14:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * An idea. What if Wikiversity had a special "program" in which every living person discussed at Wikiversity could be made the subject of an "interview"? For example, we could make a list of questions that Wikiversity participants would like to ask Richard Rorty. First, the community would try to provide answers to the questions. Eventually, the "good" questions (not easy to answer) could actually be sent to Rorty and we would see if there is any reply. --JWSchmidt 14:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I like that idea a lot! I can think of some questions myself, I'm sure you can. I know a bunch of academics who could too: could be a useful coup for Wikiversity, a kind of Wikiversity tutorial from the great and good. Better if we could attract these living persons here. When I'm drawing up my poststructuralism pages over the next few days I'll ruminate some more on what we could ask. -- executivezen 15:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Continental Philosophy
Hi Executivezen I've expanded the department a bit since you founded it. You might like to slot in your poststructuralism article into the frame work or come and paly the Nietzsche Name Game Mystictim 19:56, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Michel Foucault reading group
Hi again Executivezen I've just started a Foucault reading group starting of with The Archaeology of Knowledge and was wondering if you would like to join in? Mystictim 12:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * would love to. Could I suggest, echoing John's (JWSchmidt) suggestion about mud etc., that we take a few pages of AoK at a time and compare notes? Executivezen 20:20 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Learning and action research
Hi there! I just thought I'd point you in the direction of Learning to learn a wiki way, as a potentially interesting space - discussion is already underway on the talk page on how its participants see it and/or what they want from it. Thought you might be interested, coming from our recent discussions. :-) Cormaggio talk 23:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)