Matt said: ...Radical empiricism says experience IS the world. I want people to notice how the verb "to know" appears in the first, but not the second. The difference is that in traditional empiricism, you had to do epistemology, you had to study how we know things. In the second, you don't because it is assumed that we already know things about the world because we already are always connected to the world. This is why, if empiricism is an epistemological doctrine, pragmatists find themselves in the strange position of asserting a position that denies the problem area (much like their offering of a "theory of truth" that isn't a theory at all).
dmb says: Hmmm. I don't think I follow you here. How does the switch to radical empiricism mean we're now longer doing epistemology? Our last reading for class was Dewey's "the Pattern of Inquiry" and it seems pretty clear that he's redefining knowledge and truth along these new lines, not to mention radical empiricism itself. Is there some sense in which these are not epistiemological? I mean, "we are already connected to the world" and so there is no longer an unbridgable epistemic gap, but there is still the task of sorting out different kinds of knowledge, the methods of inquiry and what counts as truth or warranted assertions, as Dewey'd put it. _________________________________________________________________ Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble challenge with star power. http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct 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/
