In a message dated 6/27/02 3:37:13 PM GMT Daylight Time, enoonan@kent.edu
writes:
> Hi Squonk,
>
> I have serious doubts whether a person can experience the NOW, I think
> it would be too overwhelming.
> I am not sure what it means when you say epistemology is dead but
> any info would be interesting.
>
> Erin
>
> >If classic reality is post Romantic quality and lived in the past, then we
> >know nothing of reality except that which quality creates - and this is
> never
> NOW?
> >There is an established movement in philosophy that suggests epistemology
> is
> >dead and i shall look into that and report back if you are interested?
>
Hi Erin,
I agree that the NOW would be a heavy deal.
My Blackwell Companion to epistemology has an entry concerning the death of
epistemology on page 88.
It suggests that the death of epistemology movement has many sources but
highlights the pragmatists, James and Dewey. It also highlights Wittgenstein,
Quine, Sellars and Austin.
Rorty also gets a mention.
Epistemological concerns i feel go way back to Plato, and reverence for him
may have kept the area open without a thorough challenging of its assumptions
until very recently?
Science may have also reinforced perceptions that knowledge is something
attainable and perhaps even desirable?
But knowledge for its own sake may be quite a Goose chase?
With regard to the pragmatists i am reminded of a line from the last track of
Steely Dan's Kay lied: 'Be glad if you can use what you borrow.'
All the best,
Squonk.
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 - 16:02:20 BST