Hello everyone On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 11:36 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dan & Matt, > > There were two parts to my original post. > > >>>> Marsha: >>>> You make some very thoughtful points. > > Marsha: > : I was suggesting that: If one held that there were such a difference > (professional vs. amateur) than the points you (Dan) made were thoughtful, > and I appreciate your care in providing them. > > >>>> Marsha: >>>> But I think of a philosopher as someone who is curious about the nature of >>>> Reality, or at least some aspect of Reality, not necessarily someone who >>>> has an opinion about everything. RMP was certainly a philosopher. I >>>> think, also, of his example of William James becoming interested in the >>>> relationships between squirrel, tree and observer is an excellent example. >>>> Getting underneath the obvious becomes an obsession. Anyway, here's a >>>> short few paragraphs I thought appropriate. > > Marsha: > : _But_, here's a different view. > > > On Sep 10, 2011, at 5:45 PM, Dan Glover wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Matt Kundert >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Marsha, >>> >>> Marsha said: >>> My alternative view is that the differentiation between professional >>> and amateur philosopher is just so much cultural clap-trap. >>> >>> Matt: >>> When one combines this formulation of your alternative with Ron's >>> observation that "every topic is cultural claptrap" (because, I take it, >>> everything to discuss is built out of our culture, i.e. static patterns) >>> and then Dan's iteration of the value of discussion despite that broad, >>> too-true fact, I think we can get the sense in which this formulation >>> isn't as preferable as your second formulation: "the differences are >>> not really a topic that interests me." >>> >>> For the second strikes me as perfectly reasonable: there are lots of >>> topics that don't interest me (one might say: that I'm incurious >>> about). However, the first formulation was, we might say, >>> dismissive of that topic. And I don't take it that we need to dismiss >>> everything that doesn't interest us, and further that dismissing is >>> exactly not what one amateur does to another: dismissing is what a >>> professional does when they find that something isn't relevant to the >>> discipline. But amateurs have no discipline, and so seemingly >>> should always take at most a non-dismissive non-interest in each >>> others work. >>> >>> Also, I agree that many attempts to differentiate between pro and >>> amateur are "so much cultural claptrap." However, that's why I take >>> an interest in trying to find a better way to state those differences >>> should they exist in a meaningful way. I'm not sure I've found any >>> yet, and I don't take it that thinking about it is necessary for one to >>> compose themselves as an amateur (i.e., I don't think it's necessary >>> for an amateur to be interested in this particular topic). >> >> Dan: >> >> Well, that tends to go without saying... it isn't necessary for anyone >> to be interested in any particular topic, be they professional or >> amateur. Professionals tend to be very narrow in their focus, homing >> in on their particular field of interest, while an amateur has the >> luxury of examining many topics of interest. >> >> I don't care that the topic isn't of interest to Marsha or to anyone. >> But I do wonder at her motives for answering my post and then >> summarily dismissing me when I attempted to engage her in discussion. >> If it isn't of interest, why bother me in the first place? I don't >> really care if I get any answers at all to my posts... I'm unsure if >> they're designed to illicit answers anyway. Most times I am merely >> musing to myself and I share my writings in the hope that others may >> find some small value there. Whether they answer or not is irrelevant. >> If someone does answer, though, I do make an attempt to answer them >> back if it seems called for. >> >> Anyway... >> >> Dan > > > Marsha: > My motive was simply to suggest a different point-of-view, without > wanting to engage in the debate. When pushed a little harder by Dan, > I rejected more adamantly.
Dan: I'm sorry... I didn't realize I was pushing by asking how your post harmonized with mine. As I said, I wasn't just talking about philosophy but art itself... and the differences between professional and amateur artists. There is a difference though perhaps those differences are subtle. Anyway, as no one has any interest in the topic, I'll drop it. Thank you, Dan 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
