Stanley Eugene Fish (born April 19, 1938) is an American literary theorist, law scholar, author and public intellectual. Currently, he is Closed Floersheimer Professor at Benzamin N. Cardozo School of Yeshiva University in New York City. The previous fish has served as the Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University Professor of Humanities and a law professor at Florida International University and is the emeritus dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
Fish is the main character associated with postmodernism, sometimes with irritation. Instead, he saw himself as a supporter of anti-foundationalism. He is also seen as a major influence in the rise and development of the theory of responses. During his career he also taught at Cardozo Law School, University of California, Berkeley, Johns Hopkins University, University of Pennsylvania, Yale Law School, Columbia University, John Marshall Law School, and Duke University.
Video Stanley Fish
Kehidupan awal
Fish was born in Providence, Rhode Island. He grew up Jewish. His father, a Polish immigrant, was a plumber and contractor who made him a priority for his son to get a university education. Fish became the first member of his family to study in the US, earned a B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania in 1959, and M.A. from Yale University in 1960. He completed his Ph.D. in 1962, also at Yale University.
Maps Stanley Fish
Academic career
Fish taught English at the University of California at Berkeley and Johns Hopkins University before becoming Professor of English Arts and Science and professor of law at Duke University from 1986-98. From 1999 to 2004, he was the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and served as Distinguished Visiting Professor at The John Marshall Law School from 2000 to 2002. He also held joint appointments in the Department of Political Science and Criminal Justice, and is chairman of the Committee on Religious Studies.
During his tenure there, he recruited respected professors in the academic community and garnered a lot of attention for the College. After resigning as dean in a high-level dispute with the state of Illinois on UIC funding, Fish spent a year teaching at the English Department. The Institute for the Humanities at UIC names a series of lectures in his honor, which are still ongoing. In June 2005, he accepted the position of Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University, Professor of Humanities and Law at Florida International University, teaching at the FIU College of Law.
In November 2010 he joined the Visiting Board of Ralston College, a start-up institution in Savannah, Georgia. He has been a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences since 1985.
Milton
Fish started his career as a medieval. His first book, published by Yale University Press in 1965, was about the medieval/early Renaissance poet John Skelton. The fish revealed in his partial biography, "Milton, You Must Live at This Hour" (published in Nothing as Free Speech... And It's Good, Too ), that he came to Milton by accident. In 1963 - the same year when Fish started as an assistant professor at the University of California, Berkeley - Miltonist resident, Constantinos A. Patrides, received a grant. The department chairman asks Fish to teach Milton's course, despite the fact that the young professor "never - either as a bachelor or in graduate school - takes Milton course" (269). The end result of the course is Surprised by Sin: Readers in Heaven Lost (1967, rpt. 1997). Fish's 2001 book, How Milton Works , reflects a five decade scholarship for Milton.
Interpretative community
As a respected and respected literary theorist, Fish is well known for its analysis of the interpretative society - a part of the reader-response critique. Fish work in this field examines how textual interpretation depends on the subjective experience of each reader in one or more communities, each defined as 'community' by different epistemologies. For Fish, much of what makes the subjective experience of the reader valuable - that is, why it can be considered "limited" as opposed to an uncontrolled and idiosyncratic statement of self - originates from an original concept to the field of linguistics called linguistic competence.
In fish sources, the term is described as "the idea that it is possible to characterize the linguistic system shared by each speaker." In the context of literary criticism, Fish uses this concept to argue that the reader's approach to a text is not entirely subjective, and that the internalized language understanding possessed by native speakers of the given language allows the creation of normative boundaries for a person. experience with language.
Fish and university politics
In addition to his work in literary criticism, Fish has also written extensively on university politics, taking the position of supporting the campus speech codes and criticizing political statements by universities or faculty bodies about matters outside of their professional areas of expertise.
Fish argued in January 2008 on his synchronized blog that the humanities have no instrumental value, but only have intrinsic value. The fish explains, "For the question 'what is the use of the humanities?', The only honest answer is nothing, and that is the answer that brings honor to the subject.Just justifies, however, assigning value to an activity from perspectives beyond their performances, unjustified activity is an activity that refuses to regard itself as a tool for the greater good.
The humanities are their own good, nothing more to say, and whatever said to reduce the object he considered, praised. "
Fish has taught in the United States in many universities and colleges including Florida Atlantic University, Brown University, University of Pennsylvania, Harvard University, University of Toronto, Columbia University, Vermont University, University of Georgia, Louisville University, San Diego State University, Kentucky University, Bates College, University of Central Florida, University of West Florida, and Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School.
Fish as a university politician
As chairman of the British Duke department from 1986-1992, Fish attracted attention and controversy. Fish, according to Lingua Franca, was used "shamelessly - and in an unheard academe - entrepreneurial vigilance" to take "the respectable but respectful Southern English department and turn it into today's professional powerhouse, "partly through the payment of luxury wages. His time at Duke sees the relatively light undergraduate and postgraduate course requirements, suitable for the requirements of graduate heavy teaching. This allows the professors to reduce their own teaching. In April 1992, near the end of Fish time as department chair, the external review committee considered evidence that the English curriculum had become a "mix of uncoordinated offerings," lacking in "broad base programs" or faculty planning. The greatness of the missing department in the 1990s is on the front page of the New York Times.
Criticism of his work
As a frequent contributor to the New York Times and editorial page Wall Street Journal, Fish has become a widespread criticism target.
Writing in Slate Magazine, Judith Shulevitz reports that Fish is not only openly declaring itself "non-principled" but also rejecting the concept of "justice, impartiality, and fairness." For Fish, "ideas have no consequences." To take this stance, Shulevitz characterizes Fish as "not the unfailingly relativist accused of him." He is worse, he's a fatalist. "
Likewise, among academics, Fish has experienced a strong criticism. The conservative R. V. Young wrote,
Terry Eagleton, a prominent British Marxist, put aside the discredited "epistemology" as "evil." According to Eagleton, "Like almost any criticism of universalism, Fish critics of universalism have their own rigid universality: priorities at all times and places sectoral interests, the sustainability of the conflict, the a priori status of the belief system, the rhetorical character of truth, the fact that all openness is clearly a secret closure, and the like. "From Fish's efforts to co-opt the criticism against him, Eagleton replied," The right wage is that no one can criticize the Fish, because if their critics can be understood by it, they belong to the game of culture and thus not really criticism at all , and if they are incomprehensible, they belong to other sets of conventions completely and are therefore irrelevant. "
In his essay, Sophistry on the Convention, philosopher Martha Nussbaum argues that Stanley Fish's theoretical view is based on "extreme relativism and even radical subjtivism." Discontinuing his work as nothing more than a sophistry, Nussbaum claims that Fish "relies on the principle of non-contradictory regulative in order to judge between competing principles", thus relying on the normative standard of argument even when he opposes it. Offering an alternative, Nussbaum quotes John Rawls's work in A Theory of Justice to highlight "an example of a rational argument: it can be said to produce, in a truly recognizable sense, an ethical truth." Nussbaum adjusts Rawls's critique of the lack of Utilitarianism, suggesting that rational people would consistently prefer a justice system that recognizes the boundary between separate people rather than relying on the aggregation of total wants. "This," he claims, "is entirely different from rhetorical manipulation."
Camille Paglia, author of Sexual Persona and public intellectual, denounced Fish as a "totalitarian Tinkerbell," accusing him of the hypocrisy of teaching multiculturalism from the persistent professor's perspective in a homogeneous and sheltered ivory tower. Duke.
David Hirsch, a prominent critic of post-structuralist influence on hermeneutics, denounced Fish for "aberrations in logical rigidity" and "carelessness toward rhetorical accuracy." In examining Fish's argument, Hirsch tries to show that "not only is the recovery of the New Critical method unnecessary, but the Fish itself can not escape the shackles of the New Critical theory." Hirsch compared the work of Fish with Penelope's loom in Odyssey, stating, "what a critic does day by day, the other is not achieved at night." "Also," he wrote, "does this weave and not develop into dialectics, because no forward movement takes place." Ultimately, Hirsch sees Fish as left to "roam the fields of his Elysian himself, alienated from art, from the truth, and from man."
Awards
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments