Matt, Biography IS philosophy... thats about all I have to add.. -Ron
----- Original Message ---- From: Matt Kundert <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tue, March 16, 2010 3:52:07 PM Subject: Re: [MD] DMB and Me Ian said: The problem being it's "the value of it" that Matt is concerned about, whereas Dave has a greater interest in articulating where it fits in academic philosophical argument. Matt confuses that issue by quoting academic philosophers and writers in attempting to express his concern intellectually - whereas his concern is not in fact intellectual. (Which I think is what Ron and John tried to say ?) Matt: Whereas I stoutly withhold judgment on whether or not I am confusing, I guess I don't see the distinction between "value of it" and "intellectual." To use the kind of frame you are, I guess I would say that I am talking about intellectual value, just not the same exact kind as Dave. The difference, as I started putting it many years ago, is between doing biography and doing philosophy--the former cares about "what James did" and the latter about "what James can do for me." To understand what "James" stands for in the second, "doing philosophy" statement, you need of course to understand some of the "doing biography." But your relationship to the biography is as Pirsig stated. "Academic," in what you say above, I think obscures another difference--the difference between "doing biography" and "doing professional philosophy." Those two things are also different, the difference between "what James did" and "what James can do for a small conversation between people in Philosophy Departments." This difference might roughly be called the difference between "doing history" and "doing philosophy." Where I might be confusing, in this sense, is that when I state what James does for me, I don't care when looking for support whether the people I quote were doing biography/history, professional philosophy, or philosophy. Or, perhaps, with respect to what Ron was saying (I think) about me always always being worried about Platonism and how annoying that is: what is confusing is that I have two eyes staring in two different directions--one on Platonism and one on me. The problem is that Platonism turns into--sort of--professional philosophy (i.e. the conversation Plato began is [one branch of] the conversation now being continued by people in Philosophy Departments). So it seems like I care and do not care about professional philosophy--the confusing part would not be this, but rather an unpredictability on my part in when and where I do care about it. I don't know how to rectify my unpredictability, but I'm not sure that my causing of confusion is systematic (even my unpredictability is not that unpredictable). The attribution of a systematic cause for me saying weird things at weird times is the necessary step in "getting the hang of Matt," it's what one does to understand something/somebody. So I certainly won't fault people for that, however I just reserve the right to input occasionally on what I think my "systematic cause" is (despite the fact that the first-person point of view does not certify by itself my estimation of myself as the right one), or at least the nearby one cause for things I just said. And how confusing is that. Matt p.s. Pssst! There's some hidden pragmatist philosophy in the last paragraph! Who can name what it is? _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID27925::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:032010_1 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 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
