From: Matt Kundert (pirsigaffliction@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Oct 20 2005 - 18:30:49 BST
David,
David said:
Something very pre-conceptual but very knowledgeable as Nietzsche pointed
out -your body! Ignoring the body makes you and Rorty look like idealists to
me.
Matt:
I don't understand what you mean---who's ignoring the body? In other words,
answering the question that way is a non sequitor, it doesn't answer the
question. You can only answer that way after you've brushed aside such
questions---which you have to do before that and I was contending hasn't
happened.
Maybe you have previously brushed aside the skeptic appropriately, but
that's besides the point here. We were not talking about you here, we were
talking about Pirsig and DMB and stepping up with an answer like that is
confusing and obfuscates the point I'm trying to make (a point you, in some
sense, should be congenial with).
David said:
I know of no good reason why we cannot tell cosmic stories.
Matt:
In a general sense, neither do I. But that's not the question. I'm not
objecting to telling cosmic stories. The question is, why do we have to?
Or, more appropriately, why do _I_ have to?
David said:
John Dupre, Stanford Prof of Phil of Science, argues that materialism
without reductionism is meaningless in The Disorder of Things, you really
need to read this & free your mind.
Matt:
Well, sure, but you should really read some of the stuff I do and free your
mind.
See how ineffectual that is? Oh sure, you can say, "But Matt, I _do_ read
the stuff you do," but until you've walked, per impossible, a mile in my
shoes, and I've walked, per impossible, a mile in yours, we can both
continue telling the other person to "wake up" from here to eternity.
Doesn't really help the process or add any content to the recommendation.
Actually, it pretty much assures the person will ignore you, given the note
of superiority and condescension it almost inevitably sends (at least in
contexts like this).
But for the record, I don't think materialism without reductionism is
meaningless (unless you take "reductionism" to be coextensive with the use
of any particular vocabulary), its simply trivial.
Matt said:
the ole' Millian, democratic point that what you do in your free time is up
to you. All we need is the very simple, commonsensical point against
elitism, "different strokes for different folks."
David said:
What is this evil non-free time your implying? Makes you think doesn't it?
Matt:
I have no idea what you're saying here, so I'm not really sure what I should
be thinking about. What "evil non-free time" am I implying? Where do you
see that implied? It seems a very strange thing to say.
Matt
_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
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 Oct 20 2005 - 18:37:20 BST