> With all respect, I find that you consistantly ignore the part about
> "agreement with experience".
> As Matt has so eloquently articulated, the position of Rorty and
> pragmatism is that "experience" is not ahistorical and never can be,
> n'est-ce pas?
> Appeals to building shared vocabulary and solidarity are exactly the
> exercise necessariy to define the "experience" that we must compare our
> ideas with.
> You would rescue "individual freedom" from "selfish solidarity", but
> isn't this just Anarchy and Social Darwinism at it's basest form or pure
> Egoism at it's highest? Shouldn't the "experience" by which we measure an
> Idea for Quality be as inclusive and collective as possible?
I'm confused by your definition of "experience." By your questions it
seems to have some sort of collective rather than an individual aspect,
as if one's experience isn't valid unless confirmed by some group or
other. Is this a correct interpretation of your view?
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 25 2002 - 16:06:34 BST