Re: MD Rorty

From: Scott R (jse885@spinn.net)
Date: Mon Dec 29 2003 - 17:13:48 GMT

  • Next message: MATTHEW PAUL KUNDERT: "Re: MD MoQ versions"

    Ant,

    > Despite this, maybe we'll see some original philosophy from Matt in the
    new year?

    I find this request to be rather over the top. Of course Matt is "rehashing"
    Rorty, since what he is doing is comparing Pirsig's X to Rorty's Y and
    finding Rorty's Y to be preferable, much as in the past I have "rehashed"
    Owen Barfield since I found his treatment of the intellect to be much better
    than Pirsig's.

    >As Best & Kellner (1991, p.288-89) note:

    >"In the world of Lyotard and Rorty, there is no such thing as class or
    systematically enforced exclusion and oppression. In >opposition to this
    pluralism, Foucault. reminds us that asymmetrical power relations constitute
    knowledge and discourse, and >that some discursive subjects and positions
    are more authoritative than others. Similarly, Habermas argues that the
    >conditions of conversation can be distorted from the start, and hence not
    everyone participates on equal terms. Thus, both >liberal pluralist and
    >postmodern theory show an inability to grasp systematic relations and
    causal nexuses, and mystify various forms of social >inequality."

     Should I ask you to stop rehashing Foucault and Habermas (or Best &
    Kellner)?

    To something more substantive, you say:

    >To put it in his words, Rorty is still too much of a metaphysician and not
    enough of an ironist. I guess he may have dropped >LILA after starting to
    read it as he realised that his philosophy is less viable as a genuine final
    vocabulary than the MOQ.

    I think you guess wrongly. More likely is that he got to where Pirsig starts
    hypostasizing Quality, and decided that Pirsig was being metaphysical, and
    gave up on him.

    For what it's worth, I think Pirsig and Rorty both get "it" wrong: Rorty for
    being too secular to appreciate the value of Buddhist irony, and Pirsig for
    not being ironical enough (e.g, his DQ = nirvana overlooks the Madhyamika
    point that nirvana = samsara).

    - Scott

    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 : Mon Dec 29 2003 - 17:15:10 GMT