[MD] Kant's Motorcycle

[David M]

Case

Fine, but why don't we call this simple agreement and
consensus and drop the mystifications?

David M


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Case" <Case at iSpots.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Kant's Motorcycle


> David,
>
> This is not how I see objective. I think objectivity mean agreement 
> between
> multiple subjects. It is common features and the shared experience that 
> make
> something objective. In another sense, science seeks to find this level of
> commonality by looking for properties that hold from any perspective. This
> does not render other perspectives invalid. This is how values attach to
> facts. This is what makes science metaphysical in the sense of finding 
> ideas
> that apply in many situations. It is called beauty in the philosophy of
> science. Evolution is a beautiful theory because it applies to so many
> situations from physics to psychology. Relativity is beautiful because it
> explains so many things so simply.
>
> Case
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of David M
> Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 2:14 PM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] Kant's Motorcycle
>
> Hi Case
>
> Yet there is only access to this stance via
> the abstraction of our given stances
> and imagining a larger perspective, but
> full objectivity means full detachment, and
> then you would be nothing and know nothing
> and be empty of any values. This is the dilemma SOM hits.
> So we should always
> see our rationalisations as grounded in our values
> and experience from which they are abstracted.
>
>
> David M
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Case" <Case at iSpots.com>
> To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 1:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [MD] Kant's Motorcycle
>
>
>> [David]
>> Sure you cannot have any access to TITs
>> that is not via experience. However we try
>> to make sense of our shared and individual experiences
>> by telling ourselves plausible stories about the TITs.
>> These stories often take an objectivist stance,
>> how else could we talk about the big bang or
>> previous evolution because we weren't there at the time.
>> The objectivist stance is an imagined stance, we create it
>> as a way to create a reasond narrative about history and the
>> processes that underlie experience. But there is only imaginative
>> access to such ideas and processes, what we experience may
>> be caused by TITs but we can only experience felt and
>> valued change.
>>
>> [Case]
>> The objective stance is an imagined as is any stance. The point of the
>> objective stance is to make stance irrelevant. That is to seek truth
>> regardless of point of view.
>>
>> 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>>
>
> 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
> 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>