Jon, Clark, List, Jon wrote:
I agree; I think that Peirce would have the same distaste for rigid political ideologies--regardless of where they fall on the spectrum--that he clearly had for rigid theological dogmas, and for much the same reasons. I agree with Clark and Jon in this. Yes, rigidity and dogmatism block not only the way of inquiry. Best, Gary R [image: Gary Richmond] *Gary Richmond* *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* *Communication Studies* *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* *C 745* *718 482-5690* On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 8:11 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote: > Clark, List: > > I agree; I think that Peirce would have the same distaste for rigid > political ideologies--regardless of where they fall on the spectrum--that > he clearly had for rigid theological dogmas, and for much the same reasons. > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Clark Goble <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Nov 28, 2016, at 2:57 PM, Gary Richmond <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I prefer to find a value in the 'tension' between bottom-up and top-down >> solutions which Clark hinted at. I'm not at all sure what Peirce's >> preferences would be in this matter. >> >> As I said Peirce (especially in his mature phase) lived during the rise >> of Bizmarkian progressivism. While that movement suffered from a lack of >> humility in terms of what one could control, it also faced a system with >> little interstate commerce and relatively low technology. The world we live >> in today is simply radically different in terms of how integrated it is. >> Peirce may well offer compelling abstract principles. However I’m far from >> convinced even if we knew his preferences it’d tell us much about how to >> act today. The world changed too much with the inflection point of WWII >> decades after Peirce’s death. >> >> I think keeping the tension between emergent and top down approaches is >> important. But far more important is being open to data and testing our >> solutions. Neither of which is terribly common among politics or activists >> in particular. There’s lots of confirmation bias and outright dismissal of >> uncomfortable facts by all sides. That much more than privileging causal >> directions seems the problem. Or, to put it in Peirce’s terms, we tend to >> block off inquiry especially when it tends to confirm a preference of the >> political outgroup. >> >> This keeping open inquiry seems to be the greatest value Peirce offers >> politics and not a popular one (despite a lot of lip service). >> > > > ----------------------------- > PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON > PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to > [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L > but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the > BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm > . > > > > > >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
