Bodvar Skutvik (skutvik@online.no)
Thu, 20 Nov 1997 04:51:08 +0100
Dear All of LS
Recently there have been contributions to the Forum page of TLS,
and I spent the weekend reading through Ken Clark's
"Personal View" and David L Thomas' "Strawdog bites Strawman".
I have already expressed my approval of Thomas' "A Novel
Reality" and my enthusiasm is no less over his counter- Strawson
review. It describes how philosophy - once all of science and
knowledge brought together in a grand overview - deserted its
historical task and became the narrow discipline that sloshes
approved ideas round inside the academical cup.
Thomas has also done a little research on Galen Strawson's
cryptic "strawman" remark and come up with a very extensive result.
Among it the 'strawman trick', i.e.: to discredit the opponent's
views so as to more easily refute them.
Thomas' new "strawdog" term is quite good - beside being
hilarious. According to him it is not possible to find a book named
"Critique of pure Subject/Object Metaphysics" (re. Kant's "Kritik der
Reinen Vernunft") or pin down one single philosopher who defends it.
Like Galen Strawson no one wants to hear about any
Subject/Objectivity. No, no, they think NATURALLY! To get a firm
hold on the vague, shapeless ghost that refuses to step
forward, Pirsig had to construct a "strawdog" that embodies all the
unsaid but implied qualities of the subject/object notion.
Thomas' theory why the philosophical establishment shuns
Pirsig - if I interpret him correctly - is that the MOQ shatters
the illusion of a valueless (objective) vantage point from which
one can approve or reject ideas, and if Pirsig is let inside the
circles it is the end of their tenure.
Now, if Thomas would round it off a little more
firmly (it is perhaps an unfinished version) it is ready for greater
audiences. Well, any way is it a great asset for the LS, and on
the "Forum" page it is accessible for visitors.
.....................................................................
I also enjoyed Ken Clark's tour de force through history in his
"Personal View". It unfolds a vista of evolution from various points
of view, and reflects a great amount of scientific, religion-wise
and historical knowledge. For me it also tied up many loose ends left
from his first intriguing entry about mummified Caucasian people
found in China.
This is clearly something that Clark has written over a long
period, and only lately are Pirsig's ideas added to the big picture
- not quite seamlessly, but I like Ken's style and enormous field of
interest.
At first i had a few objections to his equalizing the
emergence of ceremonial burial (artifacts found in tombs) to a
budding subject/object thinking, but from his reply in the discussion
forum, and now from the complete version of his ideas, I see that it
has another significance. However , I still have doubts about the
argument that synchronity of - for instance - Hinduism and Judaism as
well as Buddhism and Islam reflects internal similarities.
Ken Clark's grand overview is Lovelock's Gaia theory, and also
here I see certain incongruity with the Quality idea in regarding the
earth as an organism in a biological sense, but this I want Ken's own
view on before launching any criticism.
There is also a - er - "faith" in the second law of
thermodynamics (entropy) that I personally have a sore relationship
with.When young it depressed me greatly to read about the
fate of the universe in the last throes of the so-called heat-death,
but wanting to be absolutely S C I E N T I F I C I believed every
word. The fact that it was to take place umpteen BILLION years from
now was no comfort, and I now grit my teeth for letting this bring me
so much fear and despair.
This last is no criticism of Clark's formidable piece, we have
plenty of time to discuss the finer points of meta- as well as
ordinary physics, thermodynamics included.
Thank you, both of you!
Bo
-- post message - mailto:skwok@spark.net.hk unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:14 CEST