[MD] Correctness and Usefulness

[ian glendinning]

Nothing out of any playbook Platt,
Straight out of my (sincere) head.
You mentioned Rorty, not me.
You mentioned PoMo, not me.
I don't talk in other people's labels, you do.

So I'm incoherent because you say so.
Rorty is incoherent because Caldwell says so.
QED.
Great arguments Platt.

What was your question again ... ah yes, that's right "who should we trust ?"

Ian

On 5/6/08, Platt Holden <pholden at davtv.com> wrote:
> [Ian]
> > Even if I agreed with that single Rorty statement, out of any context
> > - I fail to see how that supports any point you are making about PoMo
> > / Relativism as a whole. So yet another "Platteral Shift".
> >
> > Secondly Platt, hoist with your own petard again, too - we could
> > debate what Rorty meant by "reality" in that sentence - but of course
> > the word "right" is the significant one in the context of Matt's
> > thread.
> >
> > We're talking about useful vs right and the fact that some things are
> > relatively more useful (better value / better quality) than others. A
> > model of what is "right" is not one of those things.
>
> Ah yes, "more useful," right out of the postmodern playbook. From Roger
> Caldwell:
>
> "A similar problem arises, as Bricmont points out, with regard to Richard
> Rorty's neopragmatism. If, as Rorty proposes, we replace the notion of
> truth with that of usefulness, so that we accept only those propositions
> which we find in general to be 'useful', then the question arises as to
> whether they are really useful or not. That is, the very criteria by which
> we judge a proposition to be useful involve the same recourse to a
> correspondence with reality which the theory denies us in advance. We are
> left, inescapably, with the conclusion that the theory is incoherent."
>
> Incoherence -- a familiar companion to Ian.
>
> For Caldwell's full expose of postmodernism, see:
>
> http://www.philosophynow.org/issue42/42caldwell1.htm
>
>
> > On 5/6/08, Platt Holden <pholden at davtv.com> wrote:
> > > Ian,
> > >
> > > "No area of culture, and no period of history, gets reality right more
> > > than any other." -- Richard Rorty
> > >
> > > So tell us about your reality, Ian.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Platt,
> > > >
> > > > A far cry from the caricature in your head, but not so far in reality -
> > > > a gap easily brigded - by anyone who cares.
> > > >
> > > > Ian
> > > >
> > > > On 5/5/08, pholden at davtv.com <pholden at davtv.com> wrote:
> > > > > Quoting ian glendinning <psybertron at gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Arlo, Platt
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > [Platt] said
> > > > > > > Pirsig proposes a universal
> > > > > > > moral order. Postmodernists propose moral relativism.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Both true, a universal moral "order" that "orders" things according
> > > > > > to their "relative" morality in layers.
> > > > >
> > > > > A far cry from postmodernism where it's all relative.
>
> 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/
>