Hi DMB,

> Steve asked dmb:
> Can you give me an example of a constraint on knowledge claims that is 
> "practice-transcending"--one that isn't merely conversational?
>
> dmb says:
> No, Steve. That's the false dilemma again and that the point of Rockwell's 
> analogy.
> James's pragmatic theory of truth is NEITHER practice-transcending NOR merely 
> conversational. It's really that simple.

Steve:
If there is a false dilemma here (an excluded middle?), then you must
be able to provide an example of a justificatory practice that is
NEITHER conversational NOR practice-transcending.

In doing so, please consider that is perfectly reasonable in
conversation to justify one's claim that there is a jack of spades in
her pocket by reaching in her pocket, pulling out the card and saying,
"see? It's a jack of spades."

And as far as Rockwell's analogy, I already addressed it (with an
analogy of my own). If someone says that we ought not do astronomy, we
should find out what that person means by "astronomy." If that person
means we ought to stop looking for crystalline spheres, we can
heartily agree with him even though we could still take issue with him
for not taking into account the way certain groups of people use the
term "astronomy." Our issue ought to be with him not using the word
"astronomy" in the way we would prefer and in a way that would make
his position more clear rather than accuse him of abandoning
"astronomy" as _we_ prefer to use the term since that is not what _he_
means by the term.

Best,
Steve
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

Reply via email to