Hi Steve,
Thanks for that. You answered my inquirey.
In my opinion, using examples, such as Nazi, represents a hyperbole
("the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech",
see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole) which is used to sway an
argument. A personal preference against, say the rise and
exploitation of power by the Nazi's, falls within the realm of such
argumentation and is best explained by Godwin's Law
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law). Using that analogy we
can also describe Relativism as "Reductio ad Relativitum". The
meaningfulness of such an approach is not always apparent in my
opinion.
I believe the argument is to not allow MoQ to fall within the
guidelines of Relativism. What this means to me, is that MoQ does not
need to fully subscribe to the parameters of Comparison. Quality
cannot be compared, thus the (often misrepresented) label of
"undefined" is applied. Certainly any analogy (which is what we
present) is a "comparison" provided for rhetorical reasons. We can
then compare analogies in terms of better or worse, and thus we create
an understanding for MoQ. However such use of Relativism is not the
same as saying that Quality only presents relative expression. As
such, Relativism is one of many tools which can be used to present
MoQ. Thus, In my opinion, relativism should not encapsulate MoQ for
it may be destructive and lead to endless regressions going nowhere.
Relativism, in my view, implies a linear approach to Quality. I
prefer a dynamic approach.
Cheers,
Mark
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 5:01 AM, Steven Peterson
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On 11/22/11, 118 <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Steve,
>> Could you be more specific?
>
>
> Steve:
> I probably could if you say what you want me to be more specific
> about, but I'll gladly say some more general stuff.,..
>
> dmb has long been trying to use the term relativism as a way of trying
> to criticize certain perspectives including mine, Matt's, Rorty's, and
> Marsha's, but dmb doesn't have anything that we don't have that can,
> say, be used against the arguments of the Nazis. He doesn't claim any
> foundation that we can't claim. Whether are are talking about moral or
> epistemic issues, there are no arguments that he can make that the
> rest of us so-called relativists are prevented from making. With
> regard to relativism, there is just no pragmatic difference between
> his own philosophical position and the ones he criticizes.
>
> The only sort of relativism that is cause for concern is the moral
> paralysis sort. But none of us here suffer from that problem. That
> sort of paralysis among liberal intellectuals was becoming a serious
> problem in the multi-culty 90's (when Lila came out), but morally
> paralyzed relativists are getting harder and harder to find (thank
> goodness). I suggest that dmb try to find one of these people to argue
> with, or better yet, learn to distinguish between some dangerous sort
> of relativism and the Pirsigian, pragmatic, and Buddhist provisional
> views of epistemic and ethical truth that SOMers will see as
> relativism.
>
> Why would an MOQer even want to wield an SOM-laden term like
> "relativism"? It is half of the old SOM Platypus,
> relativism/absolutism. It is a term based on an SOM premise that we
> deny. It is just another version of the wrong-headed question, "is the
> Quality in the subject or in the object?"
>
> Best,
> Steve
>
>
>
>
>> On Nov 22, 2011, at 9:33 AM, Steven Peterson <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Marsha,
>>>
>>> You have raised a lot of good points here. It seems that dmb's
>>> argument is with Ant McWatt as much as it is with you though for some
>>> reason he hasn't acknowledged that fact. dmb will, as always, have a
>>> tough time articulating what particular sort of relativism--some
>>> dangerous sort?--that applies to you but not equally well to James and
>>> Pirsig.
>>>
>>> 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
>
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
