From: David M (davidint@blueyonder.co.uk)
Date: Thu Oct 27 2005 - 19:29:45 BST
----- Original Message -----
From: "David M" <davidint@blueyonder.co.uk>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 6:59 PM
Subject: Re: MD Rhetoric
> Hi Matt
>
>
>
>> David said:
>> I thought common sense and science parted some time ago, you have no
>> definition of physicalism that means anything and just seem to be taking
>> up practices from Rorty without understanding them.
>>
>> Matt:
>> I stand accused.
>
> DM: Your plea?
>
>>
>> David said:
>> Well me and a number of philosophers of science love science but are
>> against physicalism as it does not say anything useful about actual
>> scientific practice, eg Bhaskar and Dupre. So you are just not very up to
>> date with SOME current theory.
>>
>> Matt:
>> I stand accused.
>
> DM: Your defence?
>
>>
>> David said:
>> Or you can always try boring someone to death, well done its nearly
>> worked!
>>
>> Matt:
>> I stand accused.
>
> DM: Wrong, that's just some pop psychology and an insult from me. Just
> duck.
>
>>
>> David said:
>> I am more than happy to be condescending, but it is up to you whether you
>> feel bad about this, interpretation most of the way down I'd remind you.
>>
>> Matt:
>> That's funny, yet sad for me. Shrugging off responsibility for the
>> things you say so cavalierly is what would get you labeled a degenerate
>> pomo, but then---I get labeled a degenerate pomo much of the time. But I
>> take responsibility for what I say, so that lumping saddens me.
>
> DM: Lumping?
>
>>
>> David said:
>> I do think you are weak on science and should read Dupre and Bhaskar,
>> Maxwell, is that not fair comment.
>>
>> Matt:
>> I stand accused. (Funny how, coincidentally, I'm being accused of being
>> in love with science this very moment by the other David.)
>
>
> DM: I mean intellectually weak, that does not stop you loving it, a love
> we
> share.
>
>>
>> David said:
>> Your knowledge of science theory mainly from Rorty and I consider this
>> his main weakness too.
>>
>> Matt:
>> I stand accused.
>>
>> David said:
>> My finger here is pointing at Rorty's political values and his
>> presentation of US political arrangements (his idealised ones) as of high
>> value, where we never get on to the sort of questioning of paid-work that
>> say Marcuse offers us.
>>
>> Matt:
>> Huh, interesting. Why didn't you say that before?
>>
>> David said:
>> Now if I was sensitive I would be hurt now. Luckily I'm not. You could
>> ask more questions you know.
>>
>> Matt:
>> Yeah, but why would I want to do that? If the price of admission is
>> condescension and humiliation,
>
> DM: Do you want saccharin compliments?
>
> and it'd take five or six back-and-forths to
>> get enough verbiage to create something coherent, why would someone keep
>> at it? If the talk isn't that interesting, why should someone keep
>> trying to plumb its tacky depths?
>
> DM: So what's keeping you here?
>
> Since you've shrugged off all responsibility,
>
> DM: Have you picked it up would say? Your plea? Your defence?
>
> its
>> up to me to decide these things, and I feel great about my decision. One
>> of the easiest of my life, in part because of you, so thank you.
>
>
> DM: Decided what?
>>
>>
>> David said:
>> well you didn't get what I was saying, I can say that makes you 'dumb',
>> you can say I write 'crap', not sure how to resolve that, but hey, we are
>> all dumb and inarticulate much of the time. But hey,the author has no
>> authority now, so the reader really has to take the rap! Would you
>> 'agree' '?'
>>
>> Matt:
>> No, no I wouldn't. If I ever implied such a thing, I was wrong.
>
> DM: Fair enough.
>>
>> David said:
>> I really do enjoy our exchanges, but I suspect the distance between us at
>> the moment makes it very hard to communicate well. I wish I had more time
>> to explain at more length but alas I do not.
>>
>> Matt:
>> Well, I'm glad you enjoy them. The funny thing is, I don't think the
>> distance between us is very far _at all_, certainly not for getting in
>> the way of communication. I think it mainly has to do with how stupid I
>> am and how shitty you write.
>>
>
> DM: And I was just statring to think you were too clever for me,and you
> let me
> down.
>
> Cheers. Is it your turn to get the drinks?
> DM
>
>
>> Matt
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's
>> FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/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 : Thu Oct 27 2005 - 20:12:12 BST