Hi DMB,
> dmb said: > ... We should be able to move forward knowing that Pirsig and James are > offering Pragmatism and Radical empiricism as an alternative to those things > [representationalism, correspondence, Platonism]. In that sense, we all share > the same enemy. By transferring Rorty's anti-Platonism into this context, you > just end up making enemies where there aren't any, see? > > Steve said: > That's not the issue. You've got it twisted. Matt and I obviously don't see > Pirsig and James as enemies. Far from it. The issue is that you seem to see > Rorty and anyone else as an enemy who doesn't embrace the terms "direct" or > "pure" or "primary" with regard to experience. > > dmb says: > Huh? If you are not refusing to embrace Pirsig's terms for anti-Platonic > reasons, then what reasons do you have? And if you're refusing to embrace > Pirsig's anti-Platonism because of Rorty's anti-Platonism, then how is that > not a mix up? > I'm saying that you and Matt have no legitimate anti-Platonic reasons to > reject those terms. Seriously, what OTHER reason can you cite? If Platonism > isn't the problem with those terms, then what is the problem? Steve: Platonism IS the problem with those terms, but it's not that I think Pirsig is a Platonist or intends those terms to punch up Platonism. I don't. I understand that like Rorty and others he is doing anti-Platonism even when he uses these terms. I prefer not to use the terms that Pirsig uses for doing anti-Platonism when I do anti-Platonism because I think those terms are too easily construed as more Platonism. Since I can do anti-Platonism quite well without those terms, I am free not to use them. Further, I think Pirsig and James would have done better never to have used them so as to avoid being misunderstood. DMB: > And may I remind you that these terms refer to Quality? If you refuse to > accept those terms, you've rejected the whole MOQ in a very big way. So I > don't think this issue is at all trivial. Steve: Since Pirsig says that the quality that can be defined is not Quality, I can't legitimately be faulted by a Pirsigian for avoiding defining Quality with those or any other specific terms. I certainly have not "rejected the whole MOQ [the philosophy of Robert M Pirsig] in a very big way" though I have more than a couple quibbles with it. I can't see how you don't have any quibbles. Any two philosophers worth their salt ought to be able to find some things to disagree about. 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
