From: bahna@rpi.edu
Date: Sun Mar 09 2003 - 21:06:27 GMT
David,
You ask Matt EE,
"I've noticed that you hardly ever post on any topics except for a few
specific areas. You hardly ever join discussions unless they are related to
Rorty or pragmatism and stuff like that. Why? Are you uninterested in
actually discussing the MOQ as such? I mean, there's nothing wrong with
bringing up tangential issues, but what about Lila? After all this time, I
still haven't the foggiest idea what you think of the MOQ itself, only as
it relates to metaphysics in general."
You are trying to be confrontational. I don't have to come to the defense
of Matt, but you are either simply trying to "yank on his chain," or you
don't even read Matt's posts with the proper attention they deserve. His
essay is titled, "Confessions of a Fallen Priest: Rorty, Pirsig, and the
Metaphysics of Quality." I think he gives a very concise, detailed and
thorough description of what he thinks "of the MOQ itself" in this essay
He discusses Lila and has given his thoughts on it and ZMM in many other
occassions in discussions with you. I don't think you have read his
Confessions essay, but I think you should. It is quite good. I know you
have said you don't read the essays as a matter of principle, but you would
not need to ask the above question if you did.
If you wonder why Matt has not offered his two cents on political and
social issues when they are brought up in the discussion page, he has given
his reason for this before and I will leave it to him to repeat. I happen
to respect his decision to stay away from such discussions and I wish I had
always done the same, given the unfruitful results of most of these
discussions. Although, you can be assured, I am usually reading these
posts with interest and shouting encouragement at the computer when you are
making your points to the "new right" interpretations of others involved in
the discussions. Matt's point, and I think I am coming to agreement with
him on this, is that searching for an ethical or moral foundation for
social and political decisions is not a productive activity.
I am not going to encourage Matt to get into these discussions, but I
anticipate that at some time in the future, Matt's life will pay special
attention to influencing a morality we can agree upon based on Rorty's and
Dewey's ideas of social hope. If we are lucky, we will still be around
when he offers up his thoughts on this site, but either way, someone will
benefit from his thoughts and ideas.
You are very good at offering a defense for many liberal viewpoints in
social and political issues. I think you should continue to bring this to
the discussion, but don't expect everyone to join in on all the topics you
have a special interest in. I think Matt agrees with many of your
political views, but disagrees with your philosophical views. He focuses
his discussion with you on the later point. What's wrong with that?
Andy
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 : Sun Mar 09 2003 - 21:06:40 GMT