[Ian]
> Not "meaningless" - simply of limited consequential
> value in the wider world
Yes, exactly. This is why I call Ham's thesis an
intellectual exercise, but find it difficult to see
where it opens up to the rest of the world. This is
also why I find no practical use of it in my daily and
nightly living. It is a thesis that is for the idle
thinker. If you want to sit and stare out the window
and have some thoughts about something, well, Ham's
thesis would take you into 'worlds' that are somewhat
like "Backyardigans".
I have noticed that Ham likes to discuss social
issues that have traditionally kept the U.S. a moral
community. Yet, how one gets from sensibility to
essence and this somehow fits in the middle is
probably relegated to value. He values his social
ideas. Nothing wrong with that.
To be "consequential" in the "wider world" is to
admit that we already are no matter what philosophy we
proclaim. To tap-dance a reality that is above and
beyond experience and has nothing to do with
experience is fine and dandy, but then what about
experience. I don't think we can avoid that our
perspectives are dynamic and static patterns do
coalesce into our dynamic perspectives and walks of
life. These static patterns structure our gaits,
sits, and tongues as the creek bed helps make it
easier for the preceding water to flow down. Habits
to encourage us from walking into trees all the time.
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html
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/
