BTW, browsed that book on Amazon.
Looks very promising ... all the right chapter headings .... all the
right people in the index / references (except Pirsig, naturally) -
even the elusive Nel Noddings (!) - well I never.

My reading list grows ever longer.
Thanks Chris
Ian

On 3/6/08, ian glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Chris ...
> Your "point" is indeed the point - to advance, to make progress -
> that's what pragmatists do - cash in on the talk.
>
> Did this woman you love have a name, her company a reference / link ?
> The author of that book (Lou Marinoff) is male I believe ?
>
> My own opinion here will be contentious - making the distinction
> between philosophy and psychology is a moot point, if like me you see
> philosophy (and any kind of rationality) as "evolutionary psychology"
> - the highest evolved (and evolving) patterns of thinking.
>
> But I think the message you summarise is very valid.
> Ian
>
> On 3/6/08, Christoffer Ivarsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Yesterday I listened to a very interesting lecture by a philosopher that had
> > opened her own business where she did, well, practical philosophy. The book
> > "Plato - not Prozac" was referred to, and some of you here on the forum
> > might know of it.  Anyway, in short she offered to help people, with
> > philosophy, not therapy or psychology, but with classic philosophy  - to
> > structure and evaluate their life. This woman was really quite remarkable,
> > because she was perhaps the greatest Champion of rationality that I have
> > ever met, honest to the bone about it all. I just flat out loved it. Her and
> > what she represented. Because even though I had to bite my tongue every time
> > that she with a look of disgust waved away "feeling arguments" and vague
> > impressions, I could so very clearly see the Value in what she was doing and
> > what she represented.  She is in a very real way a soldier of rationality,
> > talking about, and promoting philosophy's part in society, as well as being
> > a part of that herself. She quite probably wouldn't call is such, but as I
> > see it, she is promoting that specific way of thinking that will provide a
> > base for the MOQ to stand on.  And this, people, is Quality Teaching if ever
> > I saw it!
> >
> > Now, perhaps I have painted myself as a heretic.. But I know you are all
> > wiser then that, and this has of course been debated before, but I feel that
> > it is imperative that we don't let the MOQ become anti-rational and/or
> > anti-intellectual, because this is what is NEEDED for the MOQ to come forth.
> > We all could take the ideas of mr Pirsig to heart BECAUSE we were living in
> > a s/o rational world. Perhaps we all felt that there were something missing,
> > perhaps not, - perhaps we hated it, perhaps we didn't -  but rationality we
> > knew of, no doubt.
> >
> > So. My long overdue point: See the value in the advancement of rationality,
> > because only on that base can the MOQ be built.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > 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/

Reply via email to