[dmb]
Like I keep trying to tell you, Krimel. SOM is a genuine item, a real
philosophical problem that has produced paradoxes and anomalies. Radical
empiricism is a solution to that problem. In order to understanding what the
MOQ is all about, it is crucial to first understand what the problem is.
That's why it is so important to understand the difference between Hume and
James or the difference between traditional empiricism and radical
empiricism.

[Krimel]
You keep telling yourself I do not understand the problem. That is not true.
I don't think that you understand the problem as a whole is a subtle one and
has been hashed and rehashed in many different ways. You seek to reduce all
that subtly in a single set of terms that blanket the whole discussion. That
is reduction in its worst form. I think this does violence to either side of
the argument, any way it is framed. 

Radical empiricism may indeed be "a" solution. But it is not the only one
and I don't think the way you phrase it, it says much at all. Worse I think
you are pushing Pirsig in a direction that not only out of the mainstream of
American philosophy but into the outer darkness where there is only wailing
and gnashing of teeth.

[dmb]
There is much, much more to say about mysticism and its connection to
radical empiricism. And I'd be happy to take the conversation in that
direction BUT I'm fairly convinced that this part about SOM and the two
forms of empiricism has to be understood first. 

[Krimel]
If that were to happen it would be on you to show how your version actually
tells us anything at all. You can make all the excuses you want but all I
hear from you is an extreme form of phenomenology indistinguishable from
solipsism. You make all this noise about this not being so but it is sound
and fury signifying nothing.

[dmb]
Without a proper grasp of these issues first, the mysticism part will very
likely make no sense to you. 

[Krimel]
Despite my begging and pleading, alas this remains so.

[dmb]
And I'm not at all convinced that you get this yet. In effect, we've been at
the end of chapter 29, where James's work is discussed, for many moons. The
topic of mysticism runs throughout both books but chapter 30 of Lila sort of
brings it all together. It would be nice to get to this big payoff. But I
have a feeling the time is not yet ripe. I expect an uncomprehending reply
but I also hope to be wrong about that.

[Krimel]
I know we are getting all warm and cuddly here but I think it is early for
self congratulation. Your explanations recently have been more on track but
no less off target.

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