A real pragmatist once said: Steve: > I think that is fine as far as it goes as a teaching tool so long as one > also understands that it's _always_ the first moment of awareness. It's > always now. At that point, it's best to drop the pre/post business. > > John:
Right. why 'eff around with the ineffable? What's in it for me? Since we only deal with conceived experience, any talk about "pre" seems to be profoundly ridiculous, to me. > Steve: > "Language all the way down" is one of those slogans that you wish Rorty > wouldn't use just like I wish Pirsig wouldn't say "primary, direct, pure." > I'd like you to read "language all the way down" only as a denial (that > language can be disentangled from philosophy) rather than as an affirmation > (that reality is language). The latter reading is obviously absurd, so > Rorty > would probably have expected that you wouldn't make it. John: Are you so sure Steve? I'm sort of growing attached to the idea of "language all the way down" and in the most simplistic and obvious way, the only reality you'll ever know is your conceptualization of it. It's mirrors, all the way down. How many mirrors do we need? Just enough. and yeah, Jan Anders, I remember when you first offered us that one and I've always liked it a lot. > > DMB: > > > I mean, what DO you think Pirsig's central term is all about? I'd > honestly > > like to know. > > > Steve: > It means that, in Dewey's words, reality is an evaluative term. > > John: Yes! Exactly! Dewey who? He sounds smart to me. John the absolute simplisticist PS: (kidding... I know who Dewey is. He's the brother of Huey and Louey, right?) 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
