Leibniz was a scribbler, a letter writer. Even his massive New Essays on Human Understanding was a letter to Locke, abandoned when he died. Leibniz was gregarious and communicative, craving, it seems, talk above all else (let’s not forget he was also a diplomat). … There is something beautiful in the epistle and in many respects blogging is, as Mel put it to me recently, the new epistlary. …
Rather, originality follows the logic of Lacan’s tuche or chance encounter. … An encounter with the unfamiliar, with alterity, generates an unassimialable kernel with respect to what I had previously been focusing on. That kernel functions as a seed to throw thought in motion, generate new conceptual spaces, form a weave of relations to make sense of these disparate worlds, thereby generating the work of writing.]
Dr. Ryder’s verdict on the Heehs imbroglio seems to be the final one. No one has been able to refute his formulation till now. This is perhaps an apt example of lateral thinking, and the way he traps Heehs by the latter’s own smart tricks is really a masterstroke. Thus, Heehs stands convicted even before the book has seen the light or anyone heard about it.
It is a proud moment for SEOF that in its pages a two years’ tussle has been resolved. Many are dismissive of the site for washing dirty linen in public, but we have always believed in the power of discourse. Dr. Ryder hit upon a gem in the course of such a dialogue without perhaps realizing it. Apart form the therapeutic potential of speech, the context of a conflict, paradoxically, also needs to be appreciated for such intuitive inventions.
Now that the book issue has been settled, our energies must be directed towards the Ashram. More discussions on its functioning and probable reforms can go a long way in bringing clarity to our understanding of it. May be some one like Dr. Tyger comes up with an innovative solution. [TNM]