From: abahn@comcast.net
Date: Mon Aug 18 2003 - 20:14:38 BST
Hi Matt,
Yes, I agree that Rorty wouldn't say the object of our inquiries is coping with
our environment. But let me explore this a little more. I think physics is
interesting. I am not a physicist and I probably don't have the intellectual
aptitude to become one. I read "The Dancing Wu-Li Masters" many years ago and I
was fascinated by the philosophical implications. I am not a philosopher either
and I might lack the intellectual aptititude to be a philosopher alos, but
anyway I find it interesting. Recently I read "Three Roads to Quantum Gravity."
A fascinating book and the characters in the book are real modern physicists.
Well, I think they are making very amazing discoveries--oops, developing very
useful theories. I think they believe in the existence of sub-atomic particles.
They even give these little buggers personalities. Well, according to
Rorty--and I agree with him--, quantum physics and related fields is a useful
theory, but we can't be sure of the existence of sub-atomic particles because
they are only properties of our language. We created them to explain
phenomenon. The fact that they explain phenomenon very well is not proof of
their existence. We just worked out a very useful theory and it helps us cope
and for the most part most physicists are convinced by it. Now, I agree with
Rorty and I can live with the idea that the existence of these particles is not
what is inportant. What is important is how these theories perform in
explaining and predicting. But, for these physicists, how important is it to
believe in the existence of these particles conforming to laws that must be
discovered. Hueristically, I think it is probably very important. In
mathematics I brought up Godel earlier. How can someone actually believe in the
real existence of mathematical objects and laws which must be discovered. Godel
did. This was the source of his inspiration and genious. I think it might not
be so easy to give up these beliefs. And we might suffer more if we do.
These two examples in the sciences and mathematics can just as easily be found
in the humanities. Where will the great humanist, philosophers, theologins,
poets and artists in the future find there inspiration if they don't believe-and
I mean really believe-that there is a real way for humans to live and it is
their responsibility to discover. I know Rorty says they will have to look to
their fellow humans, intersubjective agreement, and so forth. I am just not
convinced that this is inspirational enough.
Andy
> Andy,
>
> Andy said:
> I haven't totally fallen under Rorty spell. I think there are good questions
> concerning his philosophy. I just don't think yours are included in that
> category. I agree with Rorty that Truth is not "out there" waiting to be
> discovered. That it is a property of language. However, I can think of many
> reasons why it might be useful to hold such beliefs. I refered to one reason in
> an earlier post. But another example is modern physics. Would the same strides
> be made without a belief in subatomic particles and laws describing the
> relations between them. Having a goal or an aim to inquiry other than wanting
> to cope in the environmnet could very well be useful. These are the good
> questions and no pretending is required.
>
> Matt:
> Say it so, Andy!
>
> Seriously, though, Rorty wouldn't say that he would have wished that Plato had
> never existed. It very well may be that we would not have developed science or
> politics the way we did without philosophy. However, Rorty's bet is that we
> don't need them anymore, that we can become fully naturalistic, do without God
> or his doubles.
>
> And Rorty, I think, would say that the object of our inquiries isn't "coping
> with our environment." The would be the same hypostatization as making Truth an
> object of inquiry. Our objects of inquiry are local, particular things. The
> goal of our inquiries is coping with our environement, which all other things
> can safely and uncontroversially be reduced to. Predicting the weather and
> particles and what people will say are all part of "coping with out environment"
> broadly conceived. The point is to fuzzy things up so that we are just coping
> with different parts of our environment.
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> 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
>
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 : Mon Aug 18 2003 - 20:15:42 BST