Matt, DMB, Horse, et al .. You bemoaned a failure to strive for "intersubjective cooperation and mutual recognition." And then went on to say "I think philosophy is adversarial, but I don't think it has to be aggressive."
I don't think it has to be (exclusively) adversarial either - "debates" with moderated rules - are an essential adversarial part of it, but not even 50% of it in my book. Critical rationality also involves knowing / recognising / discerning / valuing when criticism / dialectic is not adding value / quality to the discussion. (Sorry Horse - but without active moderation - even debates are doomed too.) My view is that at this metaphysical level - a theory of everything level - MOST of it should be non-adversarial conversation / anecdotes / poetry / games / inclusive-fun. Ian On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Matt Kundert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Matt said: > I don't have a taste for dog-fights anymore. I may have once, but not > anymore. Now I just want to talk about philosophy. Talk, not fight. Arguments > aren't fights, but somehow I always feel like I'm fighting when I talk to > DMB. I haven't wanted to fight with him in a long time. > > DMB said: > How is it that defending the MOQ (or myself) against charges of Platonism > doesn't count as philosophy? > > Matt: > Who said it didn't? I said I don't want to _fight_ about philosophy anymore, > just talk about it. I was trying, in vain, to make a distinction between > fighting and talking to preempt your likely response, along the lines of > "you're in the wrong business, you wuss," but I think we can make a > distinction between the kind of thing me, Scott Roberts and Sam Norton once > did and the kind of thing Ken Wilber referenced, and this is one of the few > things I'm a fan of in his corpus, when he said, "Most disturbing of all, a > great number of the Infobahn males are digital predators–egocentric computer > warriors that couldn't give damn about intersubjective cooperation and mutual > recognition." I think philosophy is adversarial, but I don't think it has to > be aggressive. > > I think part of the problem is that you are "defending" when I haven't made > an "attack" in some time. > > Good luck with your studies. I had wished we could've been conversation > partners as you learned more about the history of philosophy. > > Matt > _________________________________________________________________ > Search that pays you back! Introducing Live Search cashback. > http://search.live.com/cashback/?&pkw=form=MIJAAF/publ=HMTGL/crea=srchpaysyouback > 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/
