Ok dave, I'll nibble. On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 8:54 AM, david buchanan <[email protected]>wrote:
> > Reification is a conceptual error. Reification is the mistake of confusing > a concept and a thing, of taking an abstraction for an "independent entity". > John: why isn't an abstraction an independent entity? "independent entity" is certainly an abstraction. It's just about THEE abstraction when you think about it. Lets go to the dictionary, shall we? Abstraction –noun 1. an abstract or general idea or term. 2. the act of considering something as a general quality or characteristic, apart from concrete realities, specific objects, or actual instances. 3. an impractical idea; something visionary and unrealistic. 4. the act of taking away or separating; withdrawal: The sensation of cold is due to the abstraction of heat from our bodies. 5. secret removal, esp. theft. 6. absent-mindedness; inattention; mental absorption. 7. Fine Arts . a. the abstract qualities or characteristics of a work of art. b. a work of art, esp. a nonrepresentational one, stressing formal relationships. Now let's compare this definition with what we know of "independent entity". independent entity, is a noun - yes. 1. "Independent entity" is a general idea or term 2. It's also a general quality or characteristic, apart from concrete realities or specific objects. Even more so, it's the "specific object-ness" of objects, so it well qualifies definitionally there. 3. Independent entity is a most impractical idea; It's definitely visionary and unrealistic for after all, independent entity-ness is an illusion through and through. 4. assigning Independent entity status is, as well, a seperating out that aspect of an object, taking it's entity-ness as real by withdrawing it from the matrix of relationship which is it's fundament of being. 5. It's a theft. A robbing of potential. 6.It's done absent-mindedly, all the time, by everybody, due to inattention. 7. It's also a fine art, when practiced by the hand of a master. (ahem) So in every way the dictionary offers, Abstraction is an independent entity, and independent entity, is an abstraction. > But Marsha thinks reification is just any kind of conceptualization. In the > same way that she conflates the intellectual level with the flaw in > dualistic science, she conflates a conceptual error with conceptualization > itself. You may be right. But then, she has been led to do so by philosophers everywhere, who are greatly confused on "conceptualization itself" and how it arises. Why don't we help her dave, by explaining the correct way to do this, "conceptualization itself"? You start. > And when you do that, all conceptualizations are erroneous whether they > have been confused with objective entities or not. When you do that, > mistaking thoughts for things has to be given another name because > reification no longer refers to that conceptual error because anybody who > thinks about anything in any way is reifying. > > Well, she has a point, eh? Anybody who thinks about anything in any way, IS reifying. We all do it, all the time. Wallace in that video post Marsha brought to our attention, pointed to Quantum physicists who go to all this trouble to understand objective reality can't be defined at the office, and then go home and reify anyway. > It's hard to imagine what could be more intellectually paralyzing or how a > thinker could get more stuck. Well it's not intellectually paralyzing for Idealism! It's one big reason I are one. It's all reification in the end. Deal with it. Is my motto. > Again, the conclusions have disastrous consequences and it doesn't make any > sense in the first place. On top of that, this misunderstanding of the > nature of reification would keep anyone from seeing what radical empiricism > does to subjects and objects. Pirsig and James are both saying that it is a > mistake to believe that subjects and objects are "independent entities". > They say instead that subjects and objects are concepts, not things. Once again, you're not being logical. Isn't a concept a thing? Isn't a thing a concept? What is the difference then, between "concepts" and "things"? Round and round, the merry-go-coaster rolls. > As concepts, their fine most of the time and in fact we mistake them for > concrete realities because they work so well AS concepts. Yup. I agree. > They are abstracted from experience and they function in experience and > using such abstractions successfully is just what we mean by intellectual > quality, by truth. I agree completely. > The problem is assuming that subjects and objects are the metaphysical > starting points of reality. That's reification. That's a conceptual error. > An > d the idea is to correct that error, not to denigrate or abandon concepts > as such. > > Well, assuming "metaphysical starting points of reality" would be a problem. But I'm not sure reification in its most general definitions is doing only that. But I agree with the gist of your point there. It might not be thee reification, but it's certainly a reification. > All of this raises a question, I think. How many ways can Marsha find to > hate the intellect? Is there anything that Marsha can't construe as > anti-intellectualism? And why would anybody with that kind of attitude want > to hang out in a philosophical discussion group? Isn't that a bit like a > vegan hanging out at pig roast? If that's how you roll, then isn't this just > about the last place you'd want to be? > This kind of rhetoric you resort to on occasion, bugs me. Especially on those occasions when you use it on me, but that's beside the point. What kind of discussions do you want, dave? The kind where you do all the talking and everybody else goes "ooo" "ahhhh"? you want nothing but cheerleaders on the sideline? Adrie could use some company, I guess. Somebody real might be nice. Personally, I like vegans at my pig roasts. There's plenty of other stuff for them to eat, they offer up a variety of eating experience and they don't hog all the roast for themselves. 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
