Hi dmb and Mary,

dmb,
Let's not forget that James was one of the father's of 
modern psychology.  I think it is important to read
his philosophy in that context.  There is a definite bias
in his analysis which foreshadows the extravagant promises
of psychology.

Mary,
I have found that if I come to a conclusion on my own
it has much more meaning and depth than if I read it
somewhere.  You are a free thinker, go for it.  It may
sound the same, but it is full of meaning for you!

Mark

On Feb 13, 2010, at 4:05:16 PM, "david buchanan" <[email protected]> wrote:

dmb said to Mary:
That's how James saw it. In the essay titled "Does Consciousness Exist" he 
says, basically, that the Cartesian subject is a modern, quasi-secular version 
of the christian soul.


Mary Replied:
Now I need to ask which (if any) philosopher has already come up with the next 
logical conclusion I have drawn from all this; namely, that all of modern 
science owes a big debt to monotheism and the attendant idea of the sanctity of 
the individual for its very existence?


dmb says:

I don't know about that but it's probably safe to say. Deism springs to mind 
here. This is the position of the enlightenment thinkers like Locke, Smith, 
Jefferson. Maybe it could be described as halfway between theism and scientism. 
Even as far back as Spinoza you'll see this idea that God IS nature, which is 
echoed in Jefferson's phrase, "nature and nature's god". You know, this is the 
idea that God created the universe the way a watch maker makes time pieces. 
Once it's built, the creator just winds it up, gets things ticking and then his 
role is done. This sort of imagery depicts reality as one giant mechanism and 
then studying that mechanism becomes a way to understand the mind of the 
creator. Scientism believes in the watch but not the watch maker. Einstein 
famously said he believed in Spinoza's god. But I've never been able to tell 
the difference between saying, "nature is God" and "nature is nature". In 
Spinoza's equation the term "God" seems logically meaningless although it does 
express a certain reverence for nature.

Mary also said:
As an aside, it's probably somewhat tedious for you to watch me groping along 
in my ignorance and reinventing the philosophical wheel; while, to me, it's 
kind of hilarious that I sit here and think up all these things that I am so 
proud of only to learn that somebody beat me to it 100's of years ago. A 
humbling experience. :)

dmb says:

You could just as reasonably be flattered to learn that some great thinker from 
the past also arrived at the point where you find yourself. How far off track 
could you be if others have found the same path? Even if it doesn't completely 
validate your point of view, it does show that you're not crazy or lost. 


Mary said to Ham: 
Gee Ham, the "inherent freedom of the individual" is pretty much exactly what 
I'm talking about! However, I didn't intend to "demean subjectivity" as a 
"religious myth". It's been a very useful tool for Western Civilization, and 
(as you just read above) I think is responsible for starting us down the whole 
trail of scientific inquiry and objectivity. If we hadn't done that, you and I 
wouldn't be conversing via computer today...


dmb says:
Good point. I think that's about right. Besides, the notion that there is a 
pre-existing objective reality is a very handy idea, as I like to say, 
especially in rush hour traffic. The autonomous individual is very handy in 
court, during tennis matches and nobody ever complained about the notion when 
it comes time to cash their paychecks. It has limits and gets us into all kinds 
of fake philosophical problems when it's construed as a metaphysical premise 
but as a practical matter, it works pretty well most of the time. 











_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft?s powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469226/direct/01/
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/

Reply via email to