DMB said:
If we reject radical empiricism based on the neopragmatist's
rejection of traditional empiricism, we have inadvertently
rejected the rejection.
In other words, my claims about Dynamic Quality and pure
experience are not seen as part of this new conceptual
arrangement. These claims are about concepts that replace
SOM, which has been fired and sent into retirement. But
Matt thinks I'm only re-asserting the claims of traditional
empiricists. Not so. I'm talking about Quality, a mystic term
that refers to a preconceptual empirical reality.
Matt:
My trouble with your understanding of the difference
between us is I don't think I'm "rejecting radical empiricism".
And I also don't think you are "only re-asserting the claims
of traditional empiricists." It's the "only"--I think you are
doing the reconstruction job, the "new conceptual
arrangement," but I also don't know why I need to pick up
the "preconceptual empirical reality" term in my own
"conceptual arrangement."
Does not finding a need to use "preconceptual empirical
reality" in my philosophy necessarily mean I'm rejecting
radical empiricism?
Matt
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/210850553/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/md/archives.html
