Le mercredi 24 septembre 2014 à 09:02 -0400, Stevan Harnad a écrit :
> No barriers to tear down other than those of incomprehension. Stevan, I wish it were that simple. You argue the way philosophers of language thought they could resolve the dilemmas of quantum physics through a simple clarification of language. See where we are forty years later. Lavoisier, Hassenfratz and a good many members of the Cameralist school in Austria also entertained such dreams. Alas, you do not resolve social and institutional processes that are fundamentally agonistic simply by using a cleaned-up language. Doing so helps, of course, but it is not a sufficient condition (I will leave the issue of whether it is even a "necessary condition" aside as it would draw us too far afield). The reality is that, around Open Access, there are various groups with differing perspectives. Each group expresses itself with its own set of discourse structures. When we are discussing various aspects of open access, we are part of a battle of words where logic necessarily has to accommodate rhetoric. Librarians represent the category of people that are most exposed to all the various forms of rhetoric floating around Open Access. A scientist, by contrast, sitting on top of his logic, finds it easier to assert the deductions stemming from his logic, but one's own sense of certainty is not always a good indicator of one's efficacy, particularly in mixed groups. Jean-Claude Guédon
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
