[MD] Experience, essentialism, physicalism

[David M]

H am/Scott

Ham's last email was so funny I wet myself,
especially confusing Karen Armstrong with Karen Carpenter.

Ham you are a bit mad but a lot of fun.

Idealism = nothing is an idea or being very idle.
Empiricism = everything is an emp. or a form of empire
Positivism = having a happy outlook.
Logical positivism = having a happy outlook makes sense to me
Holism is full of holes
Realism is a campaign for drinks with funny names
Dualism means I'll see you outside with my rapier
Subjectivism means your picking on me
Objectivism is when you don't agree with anyone
etc

DM


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Roberts" <jse885 at localnet.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Experience, essentialism, physicalism


> Ham (Matt K, Ian, Arlo, DMB, Platt mentioned),
>
> You keep making generalizations about "this group" which are not true. 
> Here
> is your latest:
>
> Ham said: "Richard Rorty is a favorite of this group."
>
> Scott:
> Considering how much anti-Rorty sentiment has come from DMB and Platt, 
> this
> should be questioned.
>
> Ham said:
> Since I have used the term "physicalism" at least once in my postings,
> mainly because I know it is recognized by DMB, Scott and Arlo, let me 
> quote
> from what I think is a superior source, Dagobert Runes' "Dictionary of
> Philosophy"....
>
> "Physicalism: the thesis, developed within Scientific Empiricism, that 
> every
> descriptive term in the language of science (in the widest sense, 
> including
> social science) is connected with terms designating observable properties 
> of
> things.  This connection is of such a kind that a sentence applying the 
> term
> in question is intersubjectively confirmable by observations."
>
> Essentially, Physicalism is another name for Semiotics -- the theory that 
> we
> know things only by the "signs" (or words) we use to identify them.
>
> Scott:
> This is just not true. You are confusing pragmatism and physicalism. I 
> think
> that the people posting here (some of them) can be divided roughly as
> follows (those mentioned, feel free to object):
>
> Matt K, Ian, Arlo: pragmatic and physicalist.
> Platt, Ham: nonpragmatic and nonphysicalist.
> Scott: pragmatic and nonphysicalist.
> DMB: ? and nonphysicalist (in the past he has attacked Rorty, but lately 
> he
> has been accepting Rortyan terms like "anti-essentialist" and
> "anti-representationalist". )
> Pirsig: ? and ?. Of course, he says he is following in James' pragmatic
> tradition, but a lot of what Matt K is posting about (and arguing with 
> DMB)
> is just how pragmatic he really is. And on the physicalist/nonphysicalist
> divide, he would probably say he is a nonphysicalist (physicalism being a
> SOM variant), but in my recent post I have questioned just how far he has
> moved away from physicalism.
>
> - Scott
>
> 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/
>