Hi DMB
You are odd. Anyone genuine would have emailed back and said yes we need to
look at contemporary debate as well as look at "Classical American
Pragmatism"
-if it is contemporary did it get this status of classical instantly? (you
smoke screen puff blowing clown!) I don't think so!
Sure anthologies (of already published material) often contains a little
contemporary
comment as well so yes that is something you did mention but my point is
that I think the overecoming
of Platonism and dualism is also underway in other spheres of contemporary
thought:
Bhaskar/Maxwell in philosophy of science, M.Archer in sociological theory,
various post-modern
thinkers like Stuart Sim, D.Cupitt in theology, etc, as well as US
pragmatism which to
a large extent has made a wrong turn in neo-pragmatism losing touch with
Dewey's situating
of experience in nature and over-emphasising language dependence, a mistake
European
phenomenology has fallen into less completely it seems to me, but even I
cannot survey
the whole field of philosophy in both the US and Europeso I may not be
recognising others
who are making new moves in the US such as Hildebrand who you know I am
aware of, & thanks
for not acknowledging that anyone might have a common interest as you yet
again!
I get the impression that if someone tries to add something to the debate
that you know very
little about and have never read you feel like someone is lessening your
glorious dispensing of
illumination. Chill out Dave, these rather amatuer attempts to chase people
off with content less
arguments and groundless complaints might end up leaving you as the most
glorious shining star
in a very empty corner of the internet. Look forward to the usual back
tracking or reinterpretation
of what you were actually saying in the first place that you usually come
back with. I really don't
want to know. How about telling us whether any of these contemporary
commentators have
something interesting to say about where pragmatism can go in the future?
Here's some Cupitt
for you asking where a post-Platonic, post-theistic,post-belife (Cupitt's
terms) religion might go:
"there is no great and unique religious object, but we can appropriately
take up religious attitudes
towards bare pre-linguistic Be-ing, towards the whole fountain of actual
Being and towards the
brightness of everything"
from Philosophy's own Religion
Shine on you crazy diamond....
DM
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/
