Everyone who suddenly is very interested in this thread,

I blame you Krimel.  As soon as you continued talking about truth and 
justification, a conversation I was trying to deflect, I knew, I knew! with the 
absoluteness to which Platt thinks I otherwise deny to Truth, that Platt was 
going to open his yapper with accusations about relativism.  Platt and I, for 
the most part, have a moratorium on the conversation for as long as I admit 
that truth is absolute and he admits that neither I nor Richard Rorty are 
relativists.

But here you had to open up that can of worms ;-)

I believe I may have been the first to call Pirsig a post-modernist.  I will 
take the blame for that.  It was during a brief time in my life when I thought 
such a thing existed in any coherent way.  I no longer think there is anything 
that goes by the label "post-modernism" in philosophy, though many--mostly 
those who hate whatever it is with the heat of a thousand suns--still think 
there's mileage in the label.

I also believe that there is no such thing as relativism.  Relativism _is_ 
self-refuting, and anyone who identifies as one is either 1) holding a 
self-refuting position or, as is far more often the case, 2) holding a position 
that is better labeled contextualist, or some variation.  More so than 
post-modernist, almost the only people who use the label are those who think it 
pernicious, like Platt.  It is a bugbear for them, something to fear.  But what 
most who live in actual fear of relativism don't realize is that in practice, 
relativism can't exist (which is why it is self-refuting in the first place), 
so there's a lot less to fear than they think.  I wish people that hate it with 
the gravitational pull of a thousand black holes actually attended to the 
actual practical effects of supposedly relativist thinking, rather than the 
bugbear, because attacking the bugbear just looks lame (because the position is 
lame).

I appreciate your concerns, Krimel, and I will write a post about them.  But I 
will not attend to any of the short, epithetic comments being thrown in quick 
succession surrounding this conversation.  Ian and Arlo are good 
contextualists, and they like needling Platt, so I know why they jumped in.  
Ham...well, Ham's Ham.  I don't have a lot to say about that, so I won't be 
attending to his comments either.

Platt:  you remember our deal, right?  As long as our deal is in effect, I 
won't be saying anything directly to you in this conversation.  I hope you 
don't take offense.  You just happen to enjoy going in a particular direction 
in conversation with regards to truth, but I think it is important to go in a 
different direction.  I find epithets like "relativism" just impede 
understanding about the issues, especially when hastily deployed.

Matt
_________________________________________________________________
Stay in touch when you're away with Windows Live Messenger.
http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_messenger_052008
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