[MD] For Bo

[David M]

Hi Ian

Good add, all this stuff about reason, experience, empiricism,
imagination, testing, authority,  revelation are different basis of belief.

DM

> Yes it should DM, agreed.
>
> I said "understanding the actual disagreement is part of finding out
> .... etc..."
>
> I would add one more general item to your list ....
>
> Differences in the "basis of belief" / "basis of understanding"
>
> I wouldn't use "irrational" for the "feeling" based understandings,
> the emotional ones, but these do tend to be the ones concerned with
> the participants themselves rather than their arguments.
>
> Ian
>
> On 8/23/08, David M <davidint at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> Hi Ian/SA
>>
>> Should not disagrement aim to reach an understanding of
>> where the difference is. What sort of differences? These maybe:
>>
>> Different experience
>> Different values
>> Different interpretation/value of experience
>> Different split between possible/impossible
>> Different definitions
>> Irrational feelings of difference when there is none (DMB)
>>
>> anything else?
>>
>> DM
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Hi SA, must have missed it ... interesting question.
>> >
>> > Of course I value disagreement over matters of substance, it's an
>> > opportunity to find new agreement ... and "keep the dialogue going"
>> > whilst we do so. I can't believe I've ever said anything like "and
>> > we'll all agree" ... 'cos I certainly don't believe that ... that
>> > would be like "agreeing to disagree", which is only ever a temporary
>> > "holiday" in pragmatic terms.
>> >
>> > There are certain kinds of disagreement that I generally avoid /
>> > object to, particularly by e-mail, better over a beer or a walk in the
>> > woods. Two main kinds ....
>> >
>> > (1) Negative accusations over the integrity, motives and personal
>> > character of your interlocutor. These are ad hominem attacks - a
>> > no-no. Should be moderated.
>> >
>> > (2) Debates that start from political ideological premises. Which I
>> > tend to avoid rather than object too, just a matter of preference ...
>> > not enough time in the world in my mind to progress these beyond
>> > sloganizing, slanging-matches, unless the intelocutor shows intent to
>> > drop lay the ideological points aside from the argument.
>> >
>> > Basically, it's a question of motive SA. My motive in argumentation is
>> > to find something, anything, worth agreeing, adding value to the
>> > world, not to "avoid" argument or explanation. I avoid (some)
>> > arguments that look unlikley to add any value, for practical reasons
>> > of bandwidth and sanity.
>> >
>> > As I have said before Mary Parker-Follett, would be my archetype, in
>> > my position on the subject of disagreement and argumentation. Hope
>> > that helps. What was the context of your original question ?
>> > Ian
>> >
>> > On 8/22/08, Heather Perella
>> <spiritualadirondack at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Ian,
>> > >
>> > >    I recently had a question for you, but heard no response.  Don't 
>> > > know
>> if you saw it or not.  I asked you (since your a proponent of a certain
>> middle way) if you value disagreement, or if it goes against your grain? 
>> I
>> know you like to say stuff like 'dialog long enough and we'll find we all
>> agree', and seem to be against people disagreeing with each other on this
>> forum.  Curious.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > SA
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --- On Fri, 8/22/08, Ian Glendinning <ian.glendinning at gmail.com> 
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > From: Ian Glendinning <ian.glendinning at gmail.com>
>> > > > Subject: Re: [MD] For Bo
>> > > > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>> > > > Date: Friday, August 22, 2008, 5:02 AM
>> > > > Actually, Ron, SA,
>> > > >
>> > > > Godel's argument concerns any formal system of logic
>> > > > (not just
>> > > > mathematics per se) ... but it doesn't change your
>> > > > point, since the
>> > > > argument was part of the debate about whether mathematics
>> > > > and logic
>> > > > resolve to the same thing.
>> > >
>> > n it is only a rarely used and one of
>> >
>> >
>> > > > many,
>> > > > > methods of reasoning.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > 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/
>> > >
>> > >
>> > 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/
>