From: Matt Kundert (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Oct 24 2005 - 00:30:00 BST
I get around your objection by pointing out that the neurological
description is logically impossible, given the definition of the
pre-intellectual experience. I'm not insisting on a particular description.
Well, except for the description of "pre-intellectual experience," you mean.
I think you keep trying to get me (and Pirsig) to take sides in the
historical conversations that you(and Rorty) are most interested in. I
think you want to read all these issues as if I (and Pirsig) were
philosoph-awful-falafel-ologists like yourself. Not so. Pirsig traces
philosophical history back to it very beginings and asserts that Quality was
lost long ago....
Whoa, whoa, whoa. After that ellipsis you start in on some
"philosophology," and clearly you don't want to do that, so I'm not sure
what its point was.
But at any rate, I've tried on several occasions to give a good picture of
why the distinction between philosophy and philosophology is a poor one, and
why it tends to obscure the fact that when people like myself (and Rorty and
Pirsig) talk about the "conversation of mankind" or our "analogues upon
analogues upon analogues" we're not disrespecting excellence or creativity
or the living of life. We're just focusing our attention on one small part
of it. Focus isn't bad in and of itself, as everyone knows. But I've tried
talking about that before.
So, thanks for your time DMB, the conversation was interesting.
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
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 - email@example.com
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Oct 24 2005 - 07:42:49 BST