Hi Erin:
> >PLATT:
> >Your assertions (backed by postmodernists) that there are no
> >absolutes and that no one can be certain of anything are not only
> >problematical generalizations as you point out but self-contradictory
> >statements. It's such illogical propositions put forth by postmodernists
> >that make its "truths" of such low quality--so low they wouldn't even be
> >permitted to be shown in Pirsig's gallery as they don't meet his basic
> >criteria.
> >
> ERIN: That is NOT what I asserted. What I said--- I admitted that SOME
> postmodernists (which I don't agree with) may claim that but postmodernism
> shouldn't be reduced to that stance unless you want to overimplify and
> distort it. Once again, I am UNCERTAIN about any absolute, I do not DENY
> or feel CERTAIN that there are no absolutes. There is a huge difference
> and I just don't feel you are seeing that difference in the different types
> of postmodernists.
> If you could show me the lack of logic in what I actually said I would be
> curious. I mean it when I am UNCERTAIN about absolutes, that uncertainty
> keeps the possiblity to 50/50 odds and your response has not improved the
> odds in my opinion.
Would you agree that your statement, "I'm uncertain about absolutes"
is self-contradictory, being an absolutely true statement about your
state of mind regarding absolutes? I point this out NOT to play word
games with you. My main criticism of postmodernism is its irrationality
or, in MOQ terms, its low quality of intellectual patterns. To illustrate
what I mean and what I'm concerned about, permit me to quote from
Ken Wilber, often cited here for his expertise in matters of truth and
meaning:
"The postmodern poststructuralists go from saying 'there is no final
perspective' ('or perspectives are boundless') to saying, 'therefore there
is no advantage in any perspective over another.' This leveling of
perspectives is not an interrelation of all perspectives but is itself
merely one particular and covertly privileged perspective (and thus
ends up, as we have seen, being perfectly self-contradictory: there is
no advantaged perspective except mine which maintains that all other
perspectives are not so privileged)." (Sex, Ecology, Spirituality, p. 188)
So when I run across self-contradictory assertions like, "There are no
absolutes," a red flag goes up in my mind about the quality of the
intellectual argument being made.
In a follow up post you wrote:
"To me it is a very logical statement to say you can't prove anything to
me you can only show me evidence that supports or refutes a
statement. What the heck is illogical about that."
Nothing at all. I agree. The only way I can hope to prove something to
you is to say, "See for yourself." (Another insight I stole from Wilber.)
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:47 BST