Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Political Correctness and Multiculturalism: Who Supports PC? Discussion and Replies

Political Correctness and Multiculturalism: Who Supports PC? Discussion and Replies Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1996 Political Correctness and Multiculturalism: Who Supports PC? Discussion and Replies Robert J, Kellyl,3 and Alma Rubal-Lopez We wish to thank Professor Harold Takooshian and Robert W. Rieber, special Editor and Editor-in-Chief, respectively, of Journal of Social Distress for the opportunity to respond to comments and criticisms and the Homeless of our paper. A word on procedures. Our replies will not fulfill their purpose if they are to meet every critical argument merely by posing a counter-argument. Because our responses will be more intelligible in the wider context of our general views on the problem under discussion, we have found it advisable to summarize our positions on particular issues with special regard to those aspects which do not appear to be clearly understood, ignored, or not well articulated. One way of getting hold of the debate is to analyze not its content but its form, not what is said so much as how it is said by whom and for whom. But this is a difficult task given the arsenal of enunciative strategies and discursive inflections that are so well-developed and so ready at hand. The debate about http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Social Distress and Homeless Taylor & Francis

Political Correctness and Multiculturalism: Who Supports PC? Discussion and Replies

Political Correctness and Multiculturalism: Who Supports PC? Discussion and Replies

Journal of Social Distress and Homeless , Volume 5 (2): 12 – Jan 1, 1996

Abstract

Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1996 Political Correctness and Multiculturalism: Who Supports PC? Discussion and Replies Robert J, Kellyl,3 and Alma Rubal-Lopez We wish to thank Professor Harold Takooshian and Robert W. Rieber, special Editor and Editor-in-Chief, respectively, of Journal of Social Distress for the opportunity to respond to comments and criticisms and the Homeless of our paper. A word on procedures. Our replies will not fulfill their purpose if they are to meet every critical argument merely by posing a counter-argument. Because our responses will be more intelligible in the wider context of our general views on the problem under discussion, we have found it advisable to summarize our positions on particular issues with special regard to those aspects which do not appear to be clearly understood, ignored, or not well articulated. One way of getting hold of the debate is to analyze not its content but its form, not what is said so much as how it is said by whom and for whom. But this is a difficult task given the arsenal of enunciative strategies and discursive inflections that are so well-developed and so ready at hand. The debate about

Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/political-correctness-and-multiculturalism-who-supports-pc-discussion-ZFGvDI4Cr7

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
Copyright 1996 Taylor and Francis Group LLC
ISSN
1573-658X
eISSN
1053-0789
DOI
10.1007/BF02087996
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1996 Political Correctness and Multiculturalism: Who Supports PC? Discussion and Replies Robert J, Kellyl,3 and Alma Rubal-Lopez We wish to thank Professor Harold Takooshian and Robert W. Rieber, special Editor and Editor-in-Chief, respectively, of Journal of Social Distress for the opportunity to respond to comments and criticisms and the Homeless of our paper. A word on procedures. Our replies will not fulfill their purpose if they are to meet every critical argument merely by posing a counter-argument. Because our responses will be more intelligible in the wider context of our general views on the problem under discussion, we have found it advisable to summarize our positions on particular issues with special regard to those aspects which do not appear to be clearly understood, ignored, or not well articulated. One way of getting hold of the debate is to analyze not its content but its form, not what is said so much as how it is said by whom and for whom. But this is a difficult task given the arsenal of enunciative strategies and discursive inflections that are so well-developed and so ready at hand. The debate about

Journal

Journal of Social Distress and HomelessTaylor & Francis

Published: Jan 1, 1996

There are no references for this article.