[MD] subject/object: pragmatism

[Matt Kundert]

DMB said:
I was hoping that you'd noticed my new explanations. The stuff on
James, Dewey and Mead, for example. I'd hoped you felt a sense of
relief at the absence of any talk about mysticism in relation to pure
experience.

Matt:
Yeah, and I was hoping that you would agree with my glosses on such passages.  But you didn't.  Our problem is that our vocabularies are not hooking up.  Our problem is that everything I say you seem to object to.  And since everything you say is in a dialectically opposed position, half the time whatever "pure experience" is seems wrong.  But you trot out James and Dewey and Mead--and we read the passages differently because when I gloss it, apparently I get it wrong.  I like James and Dewey.  I will continue to read James and Dewey and Peirce and Emerson.  But there is a good chance we won't read them together because we are just not speaking the same language.

All the names you love are names that I think primarily serve to obfuscate.

Matt
_________________________________________________________________
Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You!
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us