Re: MD A metaphysics

From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Wed Sep 17 2003 - 19:20:30 BST

  • Next message: David MOREY: "MD Barfield and the history of consciousness"

    Matt
    A pattern is developing, you state your position too narrowly, I complain,
    and I am happy with your
    qualifications.

    DM
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "MATTHEW PAUL KUNDERT" <mpkundert@students.wisc.edu>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 12:36 PM
    Subject: Re: MD A metaphysics

    > Hey David
    > That's why I said "either you're begging the question or using a different
    definition".
    >
    > If you are using a different definition than the traditional one, the one
    that pragmatists find dispensable, then you should produce some reasons for
    wanting to rehabilitate it. I probably won't be convinced for the same
    reason I wasn't convinced by the attempts to rehabilitate metaphysics,
    though.
    >
    > Matt
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: David MOREY <us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk>
    > Date: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 4:19 pm
    > Subject: Re: MD A metaphysics
    >
    > > Hey pragmatist
    > > The way a word works depends on how we use it,
    > > e.g. epistemology, no law that epistemology has to
    > > worry about truth, mind you I would never say that
    > > to a non-pragnmatist. As I read Rorty 15 years ago
    > > I am more interested in pushing past him than establishing
    > > what he's got right.
    > >
    > > Ha ha
    > > David M
    > > ----- Original Message -----
    > > From: "MATTHEW PAUL KUNDERT" <mpkundert@students.wisc.edu>
    > > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    > > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 8:43 PM
    > > Subject: Re: MD A metaphysics
    > >
    > >
    > > > David,
    > > >
    > > > David said:
    > > > Sure pragmatism has an epistemology, you do some creative
    > > language and you
    > > say 'it works' test rather than 'its truth' test.
    > > >
    > > > Matt:
    > > > Well, either you are begging the question or you're using a
    > > differentdefinition of epistemology. I think begging.
    > > Epistemology as some
    > > traditional variant of "What is knowledge"" would ask the question
    > > "How do
    > > we know you have knowledge?" As David says, the epistemologist
    > > says "Its
    > > true" whereas the pragmatist says, "it works". However, I think
    > > that saying
    > > that pragmatism has a metaphysics or epistemology is to pick
    > > pragmatism up
    > > by the entirely wrong handle. The answer "it works" never
    > > satisfies the
    > > epistemologist because "it works" amounts to "I don't know" or a
    > > shrug.That's the effect the pragmatist wants, but the pragmatist
    > > acknowledges,with the epistemologist, that its a non-answer.
    > > Saying the pragmatist has a
    > > metaphysics or epistemology puts the pragmatist in an awkward
    > > position, a
    > > position he doesn't want to be in. You want to read the
    > > pragmatist as
    > > continuing the epistemological conversation, but the pragmatist
    > > wants to end
    > > it. And I have no idea how epis
    > > > temology would continue with an answer like "it works". "It
    > > works" isn't
    > > a test on our praxis to see if we are doing it right, its just our
    > > praxis,its just what we do.
    > > >
    > > > As for nature being non-human, pragmatists think the only
    > > philosophicallyinteresting notion of non-human isn't tenable
    > > because we don't think it
    > > possible to unwind the human from the nonhuman and hold the two
    > > apart, which
    > > is what both Foucaultian social constructionism and Sellarsian
    > > psychologicalnominalism stand for.
    > > >
    > > > Matt
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > 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 : Wed Sep 17 2003 - 19:17:58 BST