Greetings,
Rick. Well, it wasn't my syllogism but never mind and I shall assume you are talking
about
'Noumenal' rather than 'Nominal.' Nominalism is something completely other.
The simple answer to your question is that the reasoning still fails. Indeed, I can't
make sense of
it past the first sentence, namely; "In the Metaphysics of Quality the world is
composed of three
things: phenomena, noumena and Quality." The problem is that phenomena and noumena
are, by
definition, all encompassing. If quality is accessible by sense perception then it is
phenomenal, if
it is not accessible by means of sense perception then it is noumenal. Either it is,
or it isn't, or
it is a combination of the two. There is no room for a third category because Kant is
talking about
the way humans view the world. Of vital importance here is the realisation that Kant
did not claim
that we actually live in both a phenomenal world and a noumenal world, rather, he
claimed that we
can apply these two distinct methodological structures onto a single undivided world.
Kant was no
S/O metaphysician although he, like every one else concerned with human experience,
recognised the
subject object dichotomy. (See, Butts, R.E. - Kant and the Double Government
Methodology:
Supersensibility and Method in Kant's Philosophy of Science - 1986 - Dordrecht, for
more info on
this).
Sorry if I have missed your point, Rick, but I can't sensibly formulate the argument
with the terms
you recommend. If you can, please do. I will look at it again.
Struan
------------------------------------------
Struan Hellier
< mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"All our best activities involve desires which are disciplined and
purified in the process."
(Iris Murdoch)
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
