From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Thu Aug 26 2004 - 14:18:00 BST
Hi Ham,
On the one hand, you would have us ignore logic as a "distraction to
understanding.":
> At the risk of violating the rules here, may I suggest that chasing around
> to find a logic that "permits" one conclusion over another is not helpful
> when the goal is simply to explain a concept and its meaning. Logic does
> not apply to undifferentiated Quality or Essence, anyway, and its use to
> validate (or invalidate) a metaphysical scenario is a distraction to
> understanding.
On the other hand, you would have us buy Jasper's view:
> I much
> prefer Karl Jaspers' insight.. Jaspers writes with great clarity (even read
> in translation), and his discussion of "The Comprehensive" has application
> to both of the metaphysics in question. The following is from chapter 3 of
> his small volume "Way to Wisdom".
>
> "What is the meaning of this ever-present subject-object dichotomy? It can
> only mean that being as a whole is neither subject nor object but must be
> the Comprehensive, which is manifested in this dichotomy.
Logically, there must be one for there to be a dichotomy. Thus, Jasper's
"Comprehensive" is a logical necessity. I think it was Plato who observed
a few thousand years ago: "You cannot conceive of the many without the
one."
Metaphysically we can run from logic, but we can't hide from it if we want
be taken seriously. Only artistically can we escape from logic's
restraints.
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Aug 26 2004 - 14:15:53 BST