In a message dated 7/24/02 1:44:16 PM GMT Daylight Time, pholden@sc.rr.com
writes:
> Hi John:
>
> > Felipe Fernandez-Armesto, an Oxford historian, in his recent book 'Truth
> -
> > A History and a Guide for the Perplexed', writes
>
> I've read the book.
>
> > Philosophers have adopted three approaches to rescuing truth, namely
> > correspondence, coherence and consensus. Fernandez-Armesto examines the
> > varied outcomes of each, including Rorty's, and dismisses them. He is
> left
> > with Habermas, who "has come to value 'unconstrained consensus-formation'
> > ... he prefers to be guided towards truth through collaboration and
> > communication ... his greatest enemy is the self; so he directs his
> > readers towards reverence for society; his greatest bugbear is
> 'subjective
> > reasoning', which alienates us and drives us into the hell of Huis Clos;
> so
> > he advances 'communicative reasoning'. The search for truth is a
> collective
> > enterprise, in which we learn from each other ... it has merits which so
> > far have been insufficiently praised: it is humane, undogmatic, solidly
> > rooted in tradition, optimistic, and in effect, good for the individual
> who
> > practices it and the society which benefits from it." (p 222)
>
> In the margin next to where this conclusion was proposed I jotted, "No!.
> P.C." I interpreted the idea of "communicative reasoning" to be the
> social level attempting to swallow the intellectual level. But, an
> interesting book, highly recommended to all who seek to understand
> how we confirm our assumptions.
>
> Platt
>
Hi John and Platt.
Kripke's community interpretation of Wittgenstein says the same thing.
Nothing new here.
Also, Platt makes a good point in that social patterns would have authority
over intellectual ones. The reaction of science, 'Community' to new theories
that may have their origins outside of the science community confirm this?
Also, quality is differentiated by the level of evolution from which it is
experienced, and intellectual quality is experienced as truth. This means
that it is more likely for a description of truth to be rejected by a
community than otherwise as the community, being a social pattern will not
wish to have itself constrained by abstractions, (like democracy for
example).
Quality as a whole is not experienced at all well in epistemology in my view,
as epistemology tends to put the cart before the horse? Any epistemology will
be generated by quality and therefore be an inadequate tool with which to
convey quality.
Squonk.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:28 BST