My computer mouse has got the collywobbles. My German is not up to Gabby's infantile teaching - perhaps I should let him out of the coal shed if he swears not to bomb our chip shop? Tonight my grandson and his friend, having already destroyed the enjoyment of the Barbarians beating the All Blacks in the afternoon, have had me repair a variety of computer games only to be bored with them once I'd found out how they had screwed them up. I would train in Gabby's new methods if I knew they were legal in Europe. The Thick of It is on soon, with language I understand. I am not quite sure where professional philosophy is trapped, but rather hope the conditions are worse than my coal shed. The boys have now broken the mouse on the computer upstairs.
On 5 Dec, 21:20, dj Briscoe <[email protected]> wrote: > A&B--subjective-Objectiveness > > On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 12:13 PM, fran the man <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Playing with labels, Neil, if pushed to it, I might be inclined to > > assign myself to the school of semi-haecceitists, as opposed to full- > > blown haecceitists, anti-haecceitists, or moderate anti-haecceitists. > > Of course, this is because, as an Irishman, I feel a certain affinity > > with Duns Scotus (who may have been Irish and who, some claim, used to > > be on the old Irish five pound note [although this was more likely > > Scotus Eriugena]), and also because we could immediately put the split > > as the first item on the agenda of the annual convention of > > haecceitists, in good Irish political tradition! > > > Semi-haecceitist, because I would, on the one hand reject anti- > > haecceitism by acknowledging that the uniqueness of a given individual > > is not reducible to the set of qualities it exemplifies; on the other > > hand I would not accept the standard haecceitist position that > > thisnesses are metaphysically primitive and unanalysable, rather that > > they are deeply (perhaps infinitely) analysable in their richness - > > but not, because of this very richness, comprehensively analysable. > > Which would bring us back to Kantian postulations, involving such > > ideas as, "Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without > > concepts are blind," and the philosophical difficulties of going > > beyond phenomenological horizons, etc. > > > Which leads me to remember favourably anew my decision not to pursue > > an academic career in philosophy and a renewed sympathy for Marx's > > comment about the philosophers only interpreting the world, the point > > being to change it. > > > Now you know ... :-) > > > Francis > > > On 5 Dez., 16:10, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Haecceities Orn, lets confuse them with haecceities. > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > ""Minds Eye"" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]<minds-eye%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups > > .com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
