Griceish

--- by JLS
----- for the GC

--- SINCE THE "BAD WRITING" CONTEST IS, as it were, a thing of the past, and for the record, I submit the entry 'won' by Bhabha. (Well, also-ran, really -- second prize of that year of grice). I mean, the corpus of winning entries may merit a Gricean analysis. This below was nominated by a professor at Iowa:

Bhabha writes:

If, for a while, the ruse of desire is calculable for the uses of discipline soon the repetition of guilt, justification, pseudo-scientific theories, superstition, spurious authorities, and classifications can be seen as the desperate effort to “normalize” formally the disturbance of a discourse of splitting that violates the rational, enlightened claims of its enunciatory modality..

The nominator remarked: “quite splendid: enunciatory modality, indeed!”

--- Dutton says he has dedicated his life to read Kant and I cant doubt that. He disagrees with one small point with Grice over Witters. Dutton writes that Kant and Aristotle _and_ Witters _can_ be obscure, because they are doing, like Grice, philosophy (Grice calls Witters a 'minor' figure, though -- but a figure at least). What Dutton objects is professors of "English" -- but Butler teaches _rhetoric_ -- Bhabha teaches English alright to Harvardites -- using what Dutton calls 'inept applied philosophy'. Henc ethe label for this post -- not within philosophy as per Grice (whatever his methodology and aims were and I'm NOT Saying it's just for philosophers to swallow) rather than "without", i.e. outside. When a professor of "English" applies philosophy to, Dutton has it, 'culture'. Etc.