DMB said: I understand the difference between an outright accusation and the expression of "difficulty" or "doubt". But as far as I'm concerned the question is whether or not you "get" the direct/indirect distinction (DQ/sq. In that respect, the difference between an outright accusation of Plationism and an expression of doubt about how it escapes Platonism is only a difference in the level of commitment on your part. ... You're using the anti-Platonism of Wittgenstein (and Rorty) against the anti-Platonism of our radical empiricists, James and Pirsig. If Goodman is right, Wittgenstein got his anti-Platonism from James in the first place, at least in part.
Matt: You're right, it is a difference in my level of commitment: I don't have a whole lot of commitment to pressing a critique of James or Pirsig. Maybe I don't "get" the direct/indirect distinction that James and Pirsig use, though I've been offering some versions I think work with them, even if mine aren't exactly theirs. And I still don't think I'm using my anti-Platonism against theirs. I like their anti-Platonism. The two of us, however, might disagree with what might be fully anti-Platonized (maybe even how to tell). I don't know, I'm relatively non-committal about this issue these days. I'm not really using my anti-Platonism against them at all, let alone against their anti-Platonism. And I hope Goodman is right about Wittgenstein. Like Rorty, I've always thought James and Wittgenstein go together well. (Even though, it doesn't matter if Wittgenstein got some ideas from James or not on the score of how well they go together.) Matt 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
