Interestingly David (and DMB) I've just finished reading Henri Bergson's "Creative Evolution"
Apart from his main thesis on "modus vivendi" - the creative drive that is life itself - he dwells at length on the idea that negation says no more than assertion as far as ontology is concerned. ie to say X is not white (instead of X is black) (or it's illusion instead of not real) says nothing about reality. He suggests these are just pedagogic statements aimed at educating / correcting another person but say no more about reality itself. He's right. Saying something is an illusion, says nothing about whether or not it really exists - it actually says something about how another person perceives (or says they believe) about what exists. Ian On 10/7/07, David M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi DMB > > Nice to hear from you. I am surprised that you do not get my point. In the > context of the philosophy > of language developed from Saussure onwards and all the way up to Derrida > I'd see this as a basic tenet of > the workings of language. But of course you can challenge this view. But to > elaborate a bit. My emphasis > is on the word 'all'. If we use any word, whether 'real' or 'illusion', > about the 'all' we are failing to make > any distinction and therefore using a different word either 'x' or 'y' to > refer to this all makes no difference. > If we say it is all 'black' or it is all 'white', then is not black and > white just a different name for the same thing? > In contrast we might say that experienced reality can be divided into > complimentary aspects such as > static/dynamic.Where we can understand that what is dynamic is in contrast > to what is static, so that there > is a genuine distinction and the contrasted terms have meaning in contrast > to each other. I am saying that if > you say 'it is all illusion' or 'it is all real' you are doing nothing to > create a distinction between different types > of experience that can be contrasted. > > Of course, when people say it is all illusion, they are often referring to > experience as an illusion and > contrasting it with something transcendingexperience that is more real than > experience. This is the dualism > that has been developed from Plato to Descartes to Kant. The suggestion that > experience is an illusion > and a mere appearance and mere flux compared to the certainties of > trannscendental things-in-themselves, > or transcendental ideas, is a way to de-value experience and our common > life. Nietzsche, Heidegger, Derrida, > James, Dewey, Rorty, Taylor, Pirsig, DMB and I, of course, reject this > dualism. So yes, where DMB, considers > that the dualistic use of the term illusion to de-value experience he is > right that this could have a serious impact > on our behaviour. Buit the impact is quite odd. I doubt thinking that > experience is an illusion would result in > many people sticking pins into their flesh. Yet people with religious > outlooks that de-value the actual world > have used this attitude to ignore worldly pleasures and achieve amazing > things. Nonetheless, I'd contrast the > dualistic notion of illusion with a non-dualistic and preferable notion that > all experience is real, which of course, > has no clear meaning as there is no illusion to contrast it to. But > experience is always a matter of value, > what we experience can clearly be divided into good and bad experiences. > > Of course, eastern thinkers talk alot about illusion. But they are not > dualists. What they are trying to say is that > life and experience have very few constants, all is change and flux, in the > end, SQ is an illusion created by DQ. > And they do not live in Platonic fear of change, they do not think that the > truly real must be unchanging. They > accept change and recognise its positive value. But perhaps they undervalue > order, the threat of disorder > and destruction, and the opportunities to improve out powers of control. I > had the eastern in mind when I > suggested my: it is all real is little different from it is all illusion. > > Anyone interest in how SOM banished values from western discourse should see > Charles Taylor's > 'Sources of the Self'. DMB you should read this, ask your tutor if he has > read it. > > Any help. > > David M > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9/22/07, David M wrote: > Is there any difference between: it is all real [and] it is all illusion? > I'd suggest not. > > dmb says: > What?! Of course there's a difference. Think for a while about all the many > ways one would act if they believed its all real. Then think about what kind > of life that same person would have if they believed the second one. Now > preform that same exercise on the total population instead of one person. > I'd suggest those are two very, very different worlds. In other words, the > practical consequences of holding one beleif or the other is enormous. > > The way in which we can say there is no difference is if we're only talking > about a guy sitting there and doing nothing except believing in one or the > other. In that case no belief in the world makes any difference, but this > hypothetical inert armchair guy is an unrealistic and trivial way to measure > the value of an idea. Don't you think? > _________________________________________________________________ > Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! > http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
