From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sat Jan 11 2003 - 04:17:06 GMT
Matt and all:
DMB said previously:
Outrageous. Circumventing the issues, changing the grounds of the debate,
interpreting philosophy as a dream and a joke. This is what genius does? Oh,
please. The whole thrust of this approach is outrageous. It looks like an
elaborate rationalization to give yourself permission to be irrational, to
compare apples with oranges, to change the subject whenever the challenge
seems too duanting, to ignore the things that are contrary to what you'd
like to believe.
Matt replied:
This I find interesting. Earlier, you basically claimed for Pirsig the
right strongly misread texts ("The truth behind these 'misreading' games is
already included in Pirsig's work") but deny its use for us. Now you
assert that its all irrational. Well, in a way you're right. You brought
up chess earlier and I thinks that's a good example of Kuhn calls "normal
science." You play by the rules, solve problems. But then, revolutionary
science sometimes occurs. It happens when too many "platypi" or anomalies
occur. Everythings upset and we need to change the rules (think Ptolemaic
to Copernican astonomy). It can also occur if some "genius" figures out a
better game to play. For instance, I bet the inventors of American
football were shunned by the rugby players. The rugby purists probably
called the new football game "irrational" as it was not playing by the real
rules. Until the new football players started to assert that theirs was
not rugby, but was a different game, but better, the lines became drawn and
you had to make up your mind which one was better. In America, its been
football.
DMB says:
Claimed the right for Pirsig to misread texts? That's not even close to what
I said. More generally, I guess this is a good example of what I find so
objectionable. You've changed the subject to the nature scientific paradigm
shifts, which is an interesting topic but it is irrelevant to the objections
I've raised. Yes, we are still having a conversation, but now you've moved
it to something. Then you paint this mere evasion of the issue as some kind
of revolutionary shift to some superior game. Oh, come on! You're being too
fancy for your own pants. I'm far mre impressed by the ability to stay
focused on topic and address the issues clearly. These are the rules of a
purist. These are just among the minnimum requirements for clear and
effective communication. What revolutionary changes occured to demote the
basics? I mean, what "platypi" have emerged to cause us to abandon such
things as actually adressing the issues and staying on topic? By analogy,
such moves don't make one a revolutionary, just a very bad chess player.
There's no punting in chess.
About "picking" on him, Matt said:
No problem at all. Most of your criticisms were enuciated by Platt during
the first posting of "Confessions." All I can say is that the teachers
always get pissed off when the students start to "figure" things out and
get a mind of their own. They start saying things, "No, no. You've got it
all wrong. That's not what I've taught you." And the students, "Yeah,
you're right, its not. But this way is better." Its what Socrates was
trying to tell the Sophists. Its what Aristotle told Plato. Its what
Copernicus would've told somebody had he published before he died. Its
what Kepler told Brahe. Its what Galileo told the Pope. Its what Kant
told Hume. Its what Hegel told Kant. Its what Marx told Hegel. Its what
Boas told Tylor. Its what Jung told Freud.
DMB says:
Again, you've avoided the issue. Your response here is to assign an
emotional reason for my objections, as if it were a matter of some power
struggle. (The comparisons are far too flattering for either of us, I
think.) Please believe me, that kind of thing never crossed my mind and
couldn't be further from the truth. Even if it were true, it would still be
irrelevant. Will you please admit that those who intentionally stray off the
topic and avoid the issues are not very good philosophers?
Thanks for your time,
DMB
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 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 11 2003 - 04:17:49 GMT