Re: MD Reply to Chin

From: Phaedrus Wolff (PhaedrusWolff@carolina.rr.com)
Date: Tue Jan 11 2005 - 22:43:13 GMT

  • Next message: Phaedrus Wolff: "Re: MD The MOQ and Mysticism 101"

    Hi Matt,

    Chin said:
    Just for my own curiosity, and not making a statement in either direction,
    may I ask if what you are saying is that any philosophy that is inconsistent
    with knowledge you already have will be rejected? -- and this philosophy
    must be consistent with what most philosophers would agree upon?

    Matt:
    Certainly not. I would never forward a radically conservative, static,
    conversationally debilitating idea like "any philosophy that is inconsistent
    with knowledge you already have will be rejected" (not to mention the idea
    is incoherent).

    Chin)Incoherent to you? -- or philosophy in general?

    Matt:
    I assume you are thinking of the section where I say that "we have to
    realize that Descartes and Kant, whatever their faults, were steps
    _forward_." As I alluded to at the end of that sentence, I think the
    importance of Descartes and Kant were in bringing us closer to the _demise_
    of both metaphysics and epistemology (traditionally conceived). Which isn't
    to say that we _have_ to work through the Plato-Kant canon. We can just
    bypass them. But when you ask the kinds of questions they asked, you'll
    find yourself squarely in their sights and so have to answer _their_
    questions. The bonus of having worked through the Plato-Kant canon is that
    you will gain some measure of knowledge: you'll know which kinds of
    questions lead to dead-ends and so be able to better see them elsewhere.

    Chin)So if you do not have the knowledge to recognize good or poor
    philosophical statements, and depend on philosophers of the past to build
    your knowledge base, and the questions which can be answered, then who
    offers the answers?

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Matt Kundert" <pirsigaffliction@hotmail.com>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 9:50 PM
    Subject: MD Reply to Chin

    > Hello Chin,
    >
    > Chin said:
    > Just for my own curiosity, and not making a statement in either direction,
    > may I ask if what you are saying is that any philosophy that is
    inconsistent
    > with knowledge you already have will be rejected? -- and this philosophy
    > must be consistent with what most philosophers would agree upon?
    >
    > Matt:
    > Certainly not. I would never forward a radically conservative, static,
    > conversationally debilitating idea like "any philosophy that is
    inconsistent
    > with knowledge you already have will be rejected" (not to mention the idea
    > is incoherent).
    >
    > I assume you are thinking of the section where I say that "we have to
    > realize that Descartes and Kant, whatever their faults, were steps
    > _forward_." As I alluded to at the end of that sentence, I think the
    > importance of Descartes and Kant were in bringing us closer to the
    _demise_
    > of both metaphysics and epistemology (traditionally conceived). Which
    isn't
    > to say that we _have_ to work through the Plato-Kant canon. We can just
    > bypass them. But when you ask the kinds of questions they asked, you'll
    > find yourself squarely in their sights and so have to answer _their_
    > questions. The bonus of having worked through the Plato-Kant canon is
    that
    > you will gain some measure of knowledge: you'll know which kinds of
    > questions lead to dead-ends and so be able to better see them elsewhere.
    >
    > Matt
    >
    > _________________________________________________________________
    > Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
    > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
    >
    >
    >
    > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    > Mail Archives:
    > Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    > Nov '02 Onward -
    http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
    >
    > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    >

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    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 : Tue Jan 11 2005 - 22:58:25 GMT