Re: MD Pure experience and the Kantian problematic

From: Scott Roberts (jse885@localnet.com)
Date: Sun Feb 13 2005 - 22:23:54 GMT

  • Next message: Scott Roberts: "Re: MD Pure experience and the Kantian problematic"

    Ron,

    Wilber said it much better than I can, even if he at some other point didn't
    take his own advice:

    "Let me repeat that one of the reasons that ambiguity can and does occur is
    that "experience" can be used in the broad sense ("direct awareness"), but
    then also given a common and much narrower meaning: *sensory* perceptions.
    By consciously or unconciously juxtaposing those meanings, the modern-day
    empiricist can ridicule the idea of knowledge outside experience (so far, so
    good), but then *limit* experience to the sensory-empiric modes
    (reductionistic fallacy, category error, etc.). And so to completely
    confound matters, many of the new humanistic and transpersonal
    psychologists, working mostly with intelligibilia and transcendentalia, and
    correctly realizing that their data is indeed experiential (in the broad
    sense), and wishing equal recognition as "real sciences", simply *call*
    their endeavors and their data "empirical", only to find that strict
    empirical scientists simply reject their results, sometimes with undisguised
    mocking."

    "To avoid these ambiguities, I will restrict the term "empirical" to its
    original meaning: knowledge grounded in sensory experience (sensibilia). I
    suggest humanistic and transpersonal psychologists do the same. Classical
    empiricism was an attempt to reduce all higher knowledge and experience to
    sensory knowledge and experience. The emphasis on direct experience (in the
    broad sense) was the great and enduring contribution of the empiricists; the
    reduction of experience to sensory experience was their great and enduring
    crime."

    I will add that even better than not expanding the use of the word
    "empirical" would have been to not use it at all. It's a SOM word, after
    all, one that presupposes a split between knower and that which is known.

    - Scott

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Ron Winchester" <phaedruswolff@hotmail.com>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 10:41 AM
    Subject: Re: MD Pure experience and the Kantian problematic

    Hi Scott,

    Scott;
    Of course one can't actually know anything without reasoning about what is
    sensed. I thought that was understood, given Pirsig's statement of
    traditional empiricism as "reasoning about what the senses provide".

    Ron;
    My appologies; I didn't realize we were considering how Pirsig was
    describing 'traditional' empiricism. When you speak of "traditional
    empiricism," you are speaking in terms of the generally accepted thesis
    prior to 'empiric' experience such as employed by doctors, which was
    considered quackery? - maybe 17th and 18th century empiricism? -or- are we
    extending it to cover 'empiric' experience?

    Scott;
    The
    thing I object to is what follows, that "empiricism" be extended to cover
    our artistic, moral, and religious experience. And, just to be safe, I
    repeat that this does not imply that I consider that we can't know anything
    about art, morals, and religion. Just that it serves no purpose to extend
    the word "empirical" to cover them, and causes confusion if we do.

    Ron;
    How this extends 'empirical' would be a more modern, generally accepted
    meaning of empiricism to include anything that came from the senses and/or
    'experience'.

    So what you are objecting to is artistic, moralistic and religious
    experiences being included in the term 'experience'?

    -or- Are you objecting to including experience along with what is derived
    from the senses of which you are allowing empirical to include reasoning on
    what is derived from the bodily senses?

    To clarify, I am calling bodily senses that which is separate from mind in a
    mind/body dualistic view.

    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 : Sun Feb 13 2005 - 22:27:10 GMT