[MD] subject/object: pragmatism

[David M]

Hi Ian

I refer to post-modern excess that seem to give science no value.
Like myself, I am sure you agree it has much value.

DM


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ian glendinning" <psybertron at gmail.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 9:34 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] subject/object: pragmatism


> Hi David,
>
> In the course of your responses to DMB in the DMB / Matt conversation
> you wrote these paragraphs ...
>
>>
>> DM .... I am glad that [James & Dewey] still keep faith with science but 
>> too uncritically though. The Eurpoeans are more critical but they do go 
>> to far and get silly.
>>
>> DM: Interestingly, it seems to methat some of the reasons Pirsig gets to 
>> the
>> MOQ is because he sees precisely how science and 'quantity'
>> have done something to diminish experience and hide its qualities from 
>> us.
>> We need a more MOQ compatible science, Dewey helps,
>> but we need to go further. The philsopher of science Nick Maxwell raises 
>> the
>> issue of the value-blindness of Enlightenment based science
>> in his work. A similar theme to Pirsig. Maxwell likes Pirsig too. Science
>> need to be more pragmatic and clearabout what values it
>> is trying to realise when it researches,rejecting knowledge for 
>> knowledges
>> sake. Of course, the Enlightment claimed to be objective and
>> that it did not need values as part of it power struggle with religion. 
>> But
>> the next dialectical twist is it to add these qualities back to
>> its conceptual framework having won its separation from religion.
>>
>> DM: Agree absolutely (ironic use of word) science is clearly very useful 
>> but
>> also dangerous. I think in the past it has been very SOM based,
>> or even only SQ based. As it develops it seems to be opening to something
>> more like the MOQ as it finds DQ at workin nature, i.e.
>> that there is more to reality than laws and patterns, there is the flux, 
>> the
>> emerging, the dis-emerging, the levels, on-going DQ creation.
>>
>
> I say, this a great summary of the dynamic "enlightenment" process of
> a "scientific" approach to philosophy and a more philosophical
> approach to science. I probably seem like one of the "silly Europeans"
> that goes too far against (GOF) science sometimes, but I'd subscribe
> to your words.
>
> Ian
> 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/
>