From: Erin (macavity11@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Apr 06 2005 - 05:42:49 BST
“I don't think I have any original ideas. I think that all I do is pick up
bits of Derrida and bits of Dewey and put them next to each other and bits
of Davidson and bits of Wittgenstein and stuff like that. It's just a talent
for bricolage, rather than any originality. If you don't have an original
mind, you comment on people who do.”
“A Talent for Bricolage: An Interview with Richard Rorty” by Joshua Knobe,
“The Dualist”, Issue 2, 1995, pp.56-71
(also found at: http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/rorty03.htm)
I suppose therefore that you think the philosopher-philosophologist
distinction must be dismantled to prevent Rorty (as a philosophologist)
being considered as being in a derivative and secondary class to Robert
Pirsig and other (original) philosophers. However, isn’t your project of
trying to undermine the philosopher-philosophologist distinction rather
inane as you can’t really believe that Rorty is as unoriginal as he might
modestly seem to claim?
Best wishes,
Anthony.
The philosopher-philosophologist distinction was something I thought I understood when I read about it in Pirsig but reading Matt's posts I am not so sure anymore. I think it needs exploring. I am not exactly clear about Matt's or my position yet on it but Matt has made me realize the distinction isn't as clear as I thought it was. For example, awhile ago it was suggested people put their interpretations of others writings instead of just quoting others but that never picked up. You praise DMB for helping to clarify Matt's idea but I have to say when I read Matt's post most of them tend to be his writing. When I read many of DMB's post they are 80% of quotes of others that I am supposed to piece together because they "pop" to DMB. You directly experience the "pure popness" DMB feels or you are a [insert the insult of the day] often without any explanation of what DMB thinks about the quotes. So I had to laugh at when you put that Rorty quote talking about his piecing
together while praising DMB's style which is to me very fitting of that quote. Now I wouldn't consider DMB or Rorty to be "unoriginal" when they are piecing. I know when I piece together quotes I am putting some of my thinking in the piecing. But the piecing together process is example where the distinction of philosophy and philosopholoy gets blurry to me. Another thing when Marsha says I am not a philosopher. What the hell does that mean? you mean don't think for yourself----according to the philosopher/philosophology distinction that how somebody explained it one post? or you mean you haven't studied philosophy in school---but again according to the distinction you don't need that to be a philosopher. So if you agree with the distinction then why would anybody here say "I am not a philosopher" just because they aren't in academia.
Now I am sure this is all crystal clear to you and pops pureness or purely pops to DMB but sorry I have to admit the distinction is blurry to me.
Erin
.
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 : Wed Apr 06 2005 - 07:40:11 BST