Hi DMB, DMB: > "How would a pragmatist argue that religion isn't a good tool?" Good > question, Steve. I guess that the first thing to do is get a lot more > specific about what we mean exactly by the term "religion". Despite the > pragmatic theory of truth, the MOQ rejects beliefs based on faith..."
Steve: I'm confused about what the pragmatic theory of truth is. James says truth is a species of good and is that which is expedient in terms of belief. Pierce says that truth is what is so whether you are I or anyone else believes it. I think Pierce's take is what we usually mean by truth. Rorty says that pragmatism doesn't really have a theory if truth. Truth is just the property that all true startments have in common and pragmatists don't have anything philosphically interesting to say about truth beyond that. I think I agree with the statements of Rorty and Pierce, but James may get himself into trouble in having truths that are true for some but not for others. Beliefs that are useful are true for James. But why not just call them useful instead of true? Just thinking out loud a bit, and hoping to hear other people's thoughts as I try to wrap my mind around these ideas. Regards, Steve 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/
