Re: MD When is a metaphysics not a metaphysics?

From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Thu Nov 20 2003 - 20:14:49 GMT

  • Next message: David MOREY: "Re: MD matt said scott said"

    Wim

    I like the below.
    "What can we know? (ontology)" the problem we are faced with is the
    great flux of experience, the answer is of course either that we propose
    that this is mere appearance and seek what is essential below it, or we
    do not reject DQ and suggest that what we can make sense of is just
    that some patterns can be made out that repeat.

    Also:" By the way, even the question "What is real?" is not trivial BEFORE
    you have
    > answered it with 'everything is'. Asking that question CAN be important to
    > distinguish oneself from Platonists and other villains."

    I agree with this very much, it is why I reject Matt's anti-metaphysics
    position.
    I prefer a positive ontological/metaphysical position that like Nietzsche
    says
    there is no distinction between appearance and reality but then syas and
    that is our
    position, it has great significance as you say, and it is a way of
    explaining why closure
    is not possible whilst the pragmatists can only hope and failing to put DQ
    explicitly at the centre
    of their position despite the commitment to keeping the conversation going.
    Matt likes
    the sophistication of the pragmatist anti-metaphysics posiyion ad I can
    relate to that, but I feel
    it is unlikely ever to be able to explain itself beyond the philosophically
    sophisticated.

    regards
    David M

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Wim Nusselder" <wim.nusselder@antenna.nl>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 7:03 AM
    Subject: Re: MD When is a metaphysics not a metaphysics?

    > Dear Matt K.,
    >
    > You wrote 19 Nov 2003 17:13:10 -0600:
    > 'If everything is real, then the metaphysical question "What is real?"
    (one
    > of those questions I listed long ago as Wim remembered) is reduced, not to
    > absurdity, but to triviality. Debate about reality, pragmatists say, then
    > ceases to be metaphysical and become other things, like politics and
    > literary criticism (which, as you say, are debates about high and low
    > quality).'
    >
    > THE questions as you originally phrased them, in your "little Intro to
    > Philosophology" of 31/5/01 11:21 -0700 were:
    > "There are three branches of philosophology: epistemology, metaphysics,
    and
    > axiology.
    > Epistemology deals with the 'How do I know something?' questions.
    > Metaphysics deals with the 'What is reality?' questions.
    > Axiology is a little known word that formalises the question of 'What has
    > value?'."
    >
    > I have rephrased them, most recently in my "Economics of want and greed"
    > posts (see www.antenna.nl/wim.nusselder/schrijfsels/economics.htm , also
    > linked through www.moq.org now):
    > 'That is, if metaphysics is understood to mean our answers to three
    > questions:
    > 1) How can we know? (epistemology)
    > 2) What can we know? (ontology)
    > 3) How can we know what we should do? (meta-ethics)
    > My answers are:
    > 1) We can only know by experience.
    > 2) Only Quality or value can be known experientially.
    > 3) We can only know what we should do by attaching differential meaning to
    > alternative actions.'
    >
    > Are these trivial, too??
    >
    > By the way, even the question "What is real?" is not trivial BEFORE you
    have
    > answered it with 'everything is'. Asking that question CAN be important to
    > distinguish oneself from Platonists and other villains. Once it is
    answered
    > (along with the other metaphysical questions) debates about relative
    quality
    > are of course much more important.
    >
    > With friendly greetings,
    >
    > Wim
    >
    >
    >
    > 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 Nov 20 2003 - 20:21:44 GMT