Miller's book is crammed with useful information, and I do think that it's
possible to write a 'life as philosophy' book, as I think probably Miller has
tried to do. However, just like writing a 'literature as philosophy" of 'art as
philosophy' require some real analysis of literature/art, so too does a 'life as
philosophy' require some real analysis of life -- which should be not confused
with a biographizing that begins by having presumed what life is all about. I
don't think we get much insight into life from Miller, rather, its more
voyeristic.
Reg
jon roffe wrote:
>
> I take your point, Reg. Nothing annoys me more than psychological
> reductionism
>
> However, I still wish to query whether this is what Miller does? Do you
> think that there is not perhaps another reading of the book, which sees
> Miller as describing 'life as philosophy'?
>
> Jon
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at
http://www.hotmail.com