Andre quoted Pirsig:
'Later Phaedrus felt that three-termed realities are rather unwieldly ( low
quality) and rare in metaphysics, and tries to collapse them into one. He saw
that if you collapsed them into the object you got a materialist metaphysics.
If you collapsed them into the subject, you got an idealist metaphysics. But
who had ever collapsed them into value? He tried and saw it could be done. As
time went on, he saw that not only could it be done, but that it solved huge
philosophic problems that had dogged metaphysics for centuries. It produced
harmony where there had been disharmony. It had high intellectual quality.'(
Annot.118 LC).
dmb quotes Hildebrand:
"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
the whole situation - 'subject' and 'object' have no a priori, atomistic
existences but are themselves DERIVED from situations to serve certain
purposes, usually philosophical" (Beyond Realism and Antirealism, p27).
"The first great pitfall from which such a radical standing by experience will
save us is and artificial conception of the relation between knower and known.
Throughout the history of philosophy the subject and object have been treated
as absolutely discontinuous entities; thereupon the presence of the latter to
the former, or the 'apprehension' by the former of the latter, has assumed a
paradoxical nature which all sort of theories had to be invented to overcome"
(James, A World of Pure Experience, p 27).
It probably goes without saying, but Dewey is rejecting SOM and conceiving the
primary reality in terms of "the whole situation" rather than anything
dualistic. The "whole situation" is whole precisely because it is as yet
undifferentiated into thought and thing, knower and known, subject and object,
etc.. Those kinds of intellectual distinctions or differentiations are derived
from the whole situation, and this whole situation is what James calls pure
experience or the immediate flux of life.
As James puts it, in the moment of pure experience "its phases interpenetrate
and no points, either of distinction or of identity can be caught. Pure
experience in this state is but another name for feeling or sensation
[aesthetic value]. But the flux of it no sooner comes than it tends to fill
itself with emphases, and these salient parts become identified and fixed and
abstracted; so that experience now flows as if shot through with adjectives and
nouns and prepositions and conjunctions [static patterns].
If SOM and the intellectual level are identical, then how would it be possible
for all four of these philosophers to reject it for intellectual reasons?
Doesn't prove that Bo's position is untenable? I think so. SOL is RIP and Bo is
a no go, bro.
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with
Hotmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5
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
