[MD] Food for Thought

[david buchanan]

Laird and y'all:

dmb had said:
...Radical Empiricism does not allow a metaphysician to posit any entity or 
cause that can't be known in experience. As you very likely already know, 
this would exclude metaphysical entities such as God and Kantian 
things-in-themsleves.

Laird asked:
Just to be an interjecting pain-in-the-ass (woo hoo!), if you were to treat 
the MoQ the same way as Kant's TITs when looking through radical empiricism, 
you'd have to throw out static patterns of value, since they'd also be 
"against the rules". I'm not sure that gets us anywhere with comparing 
Kant's TITs with the MoQ.

dmb says:
We'd have to throw out static patterns of value? As I understand it, the 
various levels static quality are known in experience. They are categories 
of experience. Even DQ is known in experience as is revelaed in the monikers 
"primary empirical reality" and "pre-intellectual experience". I think your 
question is not a pain at all. Please feel free to ask away.

_________________________________________________________________
Fixing up the home? Live Search can help 
http://imagine-windowslive.com/search/kits/default.aspx?kit=improve&locale=en-US&source=hmemailtaglinenov06&FORM=WLMTAG