Re: MD When is a metaphysics not a metaphysics?

From: MATTHEW PAUL KUNDERT (mpkundert@students.wisc.edu)
Date: Sat Dec 20 2003 - 17:55:50 GMT

  • Next message: David MOREY: "Re: MD Battle of Values"

    Wim,

    Wim said:
    Intellectual agreement requires (or implies, if you prefer) a shared philosophical vocabulary.

    Matt:
    I agree with most of what you wrote, like the muddle between social and intellectual levels (though I only have a very, very vague idea of what anybody means by those titles, which is why I typically stay far away from the terms), but as usual our disagreement is about philosophy. When you say "a shared philosophical vocabulary" I would wish that you drop "philosophical" and just say "vocabulary". Putting the two together makes it sound as though there is something distinctive about philosophy that sets it apart from everything else. This I think pointless. I don't think there is anything called "philosophical analysis" that is different from simple "analysis". Great philosophers come from angles we don't even see them coming from. I think of being called a "philosopher" as being the label we apply to a certain kind of harbinger of Dynamic Quality, which is to say there is nothing general to say about them aside from that they are extraordinarily creative at redescript
    ion.

    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

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Dec 20 2003 - 17:57:04 GMT