Lloyd,
What you said:
> Just a general note to your thoughts about Dewey and Pirsig. I think the
> connection comes via William James who was an important influence in Dewey's
> thought and whose pragmatism most of all is transmuted and transmitted by
> Dewey
> - so much so that some of James' later works, involving less pragmatic
> matters,
> are less attended to - because of Dewey and the Chicago school of pragmatists
> ("instumentalists") who so focus on James' earlier works.
Interesting - I seem to remember Prisig does mention James - can anybody out
there confirm this? But actually the Jamesian approach doesn't seem
ammenable to any "metaphysics of quality", whereas, to my mind, Dewey's
does. James is all for doing without philosophy and going back to what we
do, so it seems that he wouldn't take kindly to any metaphysics here - he
wouldn't want to make quality into a fundamental reality, he'd reject
fundamental realities (am I right?). This is what makes James such an
acknowledged inspiration for the later Wittgenstein. It's worth pondering
that James can inspire an anti-metaphysician like Wittgenstein, while Dewey
seems to fit some more metaphysical, MOQ, even Platonic, points view about
the reality of the aimed for good, satisfaction, quality. Yet Dewey and
James are supposed to be two peas in a pod.
Tell me more (with ref. Prisig?) about the early/late distinction in James's
work - I might need a refresher course, and it might help me understand how
there seems to be such variety in the supposedly identifiable school:
pragmatism.
All the best
David
(calling himself
Puzzled Elephant)
(don't ask)
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
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 - 16:00:51 BST