Thesis (M. Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 1963. / Type-written copy. Includes bibliographical references.

The field of cultural studies is founded upon the belief that there are no essential (ahistorical or transhistorical) limits separating theory from practice. Thus, it rejects out of hand a central principle of the West's premodern tradition of thought, which held that political theory must always be tempered by a practical awareness of human nature. The move away from this older belief in natural limits is largely carried out in the name of diversity, a sincere wish to promote openness and tolerance toward the various ends that humans may choose to pursue. Unfortunately, this ground-clearing exercise runs into certain contradictions when it is realized that absolute tolerance can provide no consistent argument against its opposite, extreme intolerance. A more subtle effect of this tolerance, however---and one that I will argue is in evidence in much cultural studies research today---is the inability to ground important political decisions. This inability leads to what Stuart Hall has called a "formalization" of the field: unwilling to commit to a particular practical vision, theory becomes locked within a self-referential sphere, or limits itself to "low risk" practical discussions (e.g., the cultural implications of record collecting). This trend towards political ineffectuality, I argue, can only be moderated by subjecting cultural studies' deepest assumptions concerning human nature to philosophical doubt. Following the argument of Leo Strauss, I propose that the most radical challenge to the mainstream of current thought is found in premodern writings. Thus, this thesis is at once a critique of the "present-mindedness" that I have witnessed in cultural studies and a limited defense of past thought.

This thesis delineates the context and history of the field of cultural studies, specifically tracing the construction of culture as a site of critical theory. Primarily, it explores the influence of Marxist philosophies in politicizing the culture concept, and subsequently surveys the set of internal debates in progressive theory. Comparing the various strengths and limitations of political economy, American cultural consumption discourse, and British cultural materialism, ultimately the thesis argues in favour of instating the third paradigm as the privileged analytical model of progressive scholarship. Cultural materialism is cited for its methodological excellence and political relevance in the contemporary world.

No description available.

No description available.

Thesis (M.A.)--Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1989. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 67-68).

Thèse (M.A.)--Université Laval, 2007. / Bibliogr.: f. 127-135. Publié aussi en version électronique dans la Collection Mémoires et thèses électroniques.

Thèse--Lettres--Paris I. / Bibliogr. p. 107-112.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Alberta, 2010. / "Spring 2010." Title from title screen (viewed on April 20, 2010) A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Sociology. At head of title: University of Alberta.

Thesis--Copenhagen. / Published also without thesis note. "Résumé" (in Danish): p. [311]-315. Bibliography: p. [273]-305.