From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Sun Oct 19 2003 - 16:01:28 BST
Platt says: "Rorty wants to rid society of the idea of objective truth
independent
> of our wishes and whims, substituting the idea of communal
> justification for belief"
Objective truth is a postulate from SOM,
and only makes sense in that context/metaphysics.
I thought we wanted to be MOQ advocates.
MOQ puts value/quality first. After that it is
interpretation all the way down. Doesn't stop you arguing
for the greater coherence/range/plausibility of your particular
interpretation against others, but you can't ask for any idependent
objects to verify what is correct. With a different model, you
get a whole different set of objects. It is this fall back towards
the essentialism of SOM that makes Matt a useful weapon in keeping
the MOQ true to its rejection of SOM, and the implications of doing so.
regards
David M
----- Original Message -----
From: "Platt Holden" <pholden@sc.rr.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 2:06 PM
Subject: Re: MD Begging the Question, Moral Intuitions, and Answering the
Nazi, Part III
> Scott,
>
> > Platt,
> > > Scruton also said, "A man who tells you truth doesn't exist is asking
> > > you not to believe him. So don't."
> > >
> > > Good advice don't you think? :-)
>
> Scott,
> > I have read a lot of Rorty, and I haven't come across anything like a
> > claim that "truth doesn't exist", and nothing indicating that nothing is
> > better than anything else. Yet that seems to be your complaint against
> > Rorty. How come?
>
> A quote from an article by Simon Blackburn entitled "Richard Rorty"
> answers your inquiry: (Simon Blackburn is a professor of philosophy at
> University of Cambridge.)
>
> "Non-philosophers who dip into his (Rorty's) writings may come away
> intoxicated by the scale, but also astonished by the message. How could
> anyone, for example, seriously hold, as Rorty has, that 'truth is what
> your contemporaries let you get away with,' or that 'no area of
> culture, and no period of history, gets Reality more right than any
> other.'? Is it really possible to hold that only 'old-fashioned
> metaphysical prigs' talk unblushingly of truth any more?"
>
> Incidentally, as a collector of bon mots from the MD I find the
> following from you posted last Jan 15 to be a gem:
>
> "What I find disingenuous is when you (Matt) say you don't want to be
> led back to metaphysics. What you and Rorty are doing is assuming a
> metaphysical stance as given and making points from it, and then
> claiming 'we don't do metaphysics.'"
>
> Likewise, what I find so ludicrous in Rorty's and the postmodernists'
> position is their determination to advance their own concepts of truth
> while simultaneously denying there is such a thing. They assert general
> truths while claiming in the same breath that general truths don't
> exist. Example: "We know it to be absolutely true that truth is
> provisional."
>
> I consider Rorty and his fellow travelers dangerous to a free society
> because without confidence in the concept of truth (and it's companion,
> logic), the public is disarmed against lies. ("I did not have sex with
> that woman . . ." is still being defended by many as a statement of
> fact.)
>
> Rorty wants to rid society of the idea of objective truth independent
> of our wishes and whims, substituting the idea of communal
> justification for belief, i.e., if everybody (defined as the power
> elite in charge at the moment) says diversity is good, then it must be
> true that diversity is good. Naturally the individual voice that's
> raised against such "conventional wisdom" is pilloried. It's no mystery
> why college campuses today have strict, politically correct speech
> codes. It's the predictable consequence of Rorty's "intersubjective
> agreement" which is a simply a not-so-subtle disguise for raw, power
> politics.
>
> To put it simply, Rorty's views are abhorrent to anyone who puts a high
> premium on intellectual freedom and integrity.
>
> Platt
>
>
>
> 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 Oct 19 2003 - 16:04:33 BST