Dmb, Ant, Yea, I really shouldnt post after a double shift. Lets see what was I on about.?.. Oh yea, The first question is aimed primarly at the specifics of pragmatic truths function within radical empiricism. Specifically within the context of meaningful ideas I wondered if it consisted of a sort of inquirey that weighed pros and cons in a dialectical way ( as a process of compare/contrast) This is of course after these ideas make the first cut of weighing the practicle difference between them by holding them if they were true, (no difference-false problem). Now within the context of practicle differences and consequences in experience what method of inquirey is employed to further clarify and assist in a making a quality moral judgement. An analogy to what I am on about is when Bob not only said we have to care, he gave some pretty specific examples in regard to breaking down and diagnosing an engine. How to avoid gumption traps by being clean, orderly, making notes/sketches of the process of deconstructing so when its time to put it all back together after making a repair it should function better, the end product or "good". As a mechanic, I am really interested in this topic in Practicle terms. Bob used the slips of paper in trays to make systematic value judgements, I was wondering if radical empiricism offered any examples as specific as Bob does. Thank you for asking me to try to be more clear. Night shift is taking it's toll on me. -Ron .
________________________________ From: Ant McWatt <[email protected]> To: moq discuss <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [MD] The Two Contexts of the MOQ Ron said to DMB, June 18th 2013: Seeing how this topic of conversation gets derailed and hijacked by the 180 degree point of view, I would like to ask what form or function within the context of mythos reconstruction would serve best in the radically empirical method of falsifying truth theories or to be more precise finding which theories are better than others. Do either of you see dialectic playing a role in this process of inquirey [sic]? Also I think what has to be kept in mind when people connect correspondence theory with pragmatic truth is that a pragmatist does not seek an ideas agreement with experience so much as a discerning which ideas have the most meaning in the flow of said experience. Those with the most meaning being said to "agree". I wonder if you also would agree. I believe if an agreement can be arrived at in this context we can continue the reconstruction with greater clarity, or at the very least advance the discussion on this topic which does not get nearly enough attention... Dave Buchanan wondered June 19th: I don't understand these questions. Ant McWatt comments: I'm not surprized Dave. Neither do I!!! Ron, is there any chance of you rephrasing your questions here? Anthony . 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
