Hi Ron, I don't mean to upset you, but: Bravo! Bravo!! Bravo!!!
Love, Marsha On May 17, 2010, at 11:00 PM, X Acto wrote: > "to begin with,Quality that is independant of experience doesent exist" > > "Quality, on which there is complete agreement, is a universal source of > things. The objects > about which people disagree are merely transitory" > -RMP > > Ron: > I think it helps to remember another quote, that the true is a species of the > good. > That truth is what people disagree about, but the Good, that there is > complete agreement on > is the universal source of those truths. > I take that to mean that the good, or Quality, is not relative but truth is. > But truth does spring > from the Good. > I takes James to be saying the same. > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: david buchanan <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Mon, May 17, 2010 2:56:51 PM > Subject: Re: [MD] Pirsig's theory of truth > > > dmb said: > ... the Wikipedia article on RELATIVISM has a section on RORTY: Let me repeat > the salient point. "He also argues ...that justification is RELATIVE; > justification is justification to an audience, for Rorty. Thus his position, > in the view of MANY COMMENTATORS, adds up to RELATIVISM." > > Steve replied: > > Does he argue that? You have someone from wiki saying that Rorty's argument > that justification is relative to an audience amounts to relativism, but you > still haven't said what relativism is. Just because something is relative to > something else doesn't amount to relativism. Does it? Isn't everything > relative to everything else in lots and lots of ways? What is something that > is in no way related to anything else? > > > dmb says: > > Firstly, yes, he does argue that. The Stanford article on Rorty says the same > thing and you can find corroboration in many, many other places. > > Secondly, it's not just someone from Wiki saying that justification is > relative to an audience for Rorty. You have someone from Wiki reporting that > many commentators think that Rorty's views add up to relativism. Since I've > read some of these commentators, I can testify to that fact. Rorty himself > was perfectly aware of this common accusation. > > Thirdly, there are lots of different kinds of relativism but this little Wiki > is very specific. It defines relativism as the view that justification is > relative to the group and it describes Rorty's position as exactly that. You > have both a definition and the reason for thinking Rorty fits that > definition. I think this is about as clear as it can be. > > Fourthly, the idea that everything is related to everything else simply isn't > what we mean by relativism. To say that justification is "relative" to the > group is not to say it is "related" to the group. That would not really be > incorrect so much as empty and obvious. It means that the standards of > justification depend entirely on the group and will therefore differ from > group to group. We see this in the position that Rorty himself calls > "ethnocentrism". > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > 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 ___ 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
