Hi DMB, There's a difference between necessary and sufficient.
> > Marsha said: > I wrote "To recap why I think Buddhism cannot be used as an exception > to the Intellectual Level being SOM, I offer these to quotes that > indicate that Buddhism used logic and the scientific method for an > objective study of 'Mind'." I DID NOT write that SOM equated to logic > and the scientific method. > > > dmb says: > > Unbelievable. > > So you DID NOT say "Buddhism used logic and the scientific method" and > you DID NOT give that as your reason for thinking "Buddhism cannot be > used as an exception to the Intellectual Level being SOM"? > > I mean, if you're NOT equating logic and science with SOM, then the > quotes indicate nothing about whether or not Buddhism is an exception > to SOM. > > Anyway, I think SOM has to be inflated and expanded beyond its actual > meaning before it can be equated with intellect. I think that > supporters of the idea do a lot of inflating and so your moves here > look like some more of that. > > > > > > > dmb says: > > > > > > Can SOM be equated with logic and the scientific method? I don't > think so. In fact, when James published his essays in radical > empiricism, Dewey was impressed with the way it retains empirical > science even though it explicitly rejects SOM. He was pretty psyched, > in fact. > > > > > > Anyway, I offer these quotes to show you how most pragmatists line > up on this... > > > > > > "The instant field of the present is at all times what I call the > 'pure experience'. It is only virtually or potentially either a subject > or an object as yet" (James 1912, 23). > > > "When a subject-object metaphysics regards matter and mind as > eternally separate and eternally unalike, it creates a platypus bigger > than the solar system" (Pirsig 1991, 153). > > > "Realists and idealists assume that subject and object are discrete > and then debate which term deserves first rank. Dewey assumes that what > is primary is a whole situation - 'subject' and 'object' have no a > priori, atomistic existences but are themselves DERIVED from situations > to serve certain purposes, usually philosophical" (Hildebrand p27) > > > Hildebrand says, "An empirical approach to metaphysics need not > presuppose a subject/object dualism - indeed, if experience is > perspicuously attended to, it should not...Since Dewey will not begin > metaphysical inquiries by presupposing a subject/object dualism, he > does not need to ward off the same skeptical demons that plagued > Descartes...Dewey hoped that through examples and empirical > observations his distinction between primary and secondary experience > would be patent and its adoption might economize intellectual effort" > > > Notice that they are not only rejecting SOM here but also taking up > those two categories of experience. Primary and secondary are dynamic > and static or preconceptual and reflective. Dewey also calls them Had > and Known. He, James and Pirsig are all the list of Pragmatic radical > empiricists. But Rorty is not one of these precisely because he rejects > this other, non-SOM distinction. > > > "To understand why Rorty is wrong," Hildebrand says, "requires that > we briefly revisit and defend the underlying distinction between > primary and secondary experience, a distinction Rorty also rejects as > 'bad faith'". (116-7) > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from > your inbox. > http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL > :ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2 > 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
