http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a502RejLz8s OPpss, as nice as that is, perhaps not the same guy...
On Dec 5, 9:28 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > Gehen Sie für die phonetische Strategie sounds better to the 'English > Ear'. The ultimate haecceitists were the ethnomethodologists, so > crudely indoctrinated they though Garfinkel invented them. He was > rude to my mate and his dog, so I have aversion to the term. > > On 6 Dec, 00:56, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > "...Now you know ... :-) ..." - fran > > > Welcome to the dark side of anarchy fran!!! ;-) > > > On Dec 5, 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.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- 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.
