--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote:
> The problem is compounded in those who carefully stayed > away from him and never met the man. They got to base > their fantasies on what he wrote in books and said on > videotapes, and carefully stayed far, far away so that > they'd never have to encounter any reality that might > contradict their fantasies. What is reality and what is fantasy Barry? (Uh-oh). Is the reality the 'particular' (the hunch in the back of Richard III), or the 'universal' (the abstract, the teaching). Which is *more* real? Take me. I'm a "Hendrix freak". So, just as one example, I absolutely love "The Wind Cries Mary". It means a lot to me (and to a lot of others to be sure). http://youtu.be/zNps6k7oVG4 Now I discover that the occasion for the creation of this gem by the force-of-nature Voodoo Chile was in fact some badly prepared mashed potato: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21292762 If you're of a nominalist persuasion I think this would be a bit of a downer. Philosophical realists are not bothered. If you emphasize as *the* reality MMY the man (who ate, shat, copulated and all the rest), you are (perhaps uncritically) taking the former view. Perhaps ideas are more important than bags under the eyes? Perhaps Einstein's equations are more real than his hair style? (PS I read MMY's books *and* met the guy. I was not disappointed in the flesh as it happens).
