[MD] Another parallel

[Ian Glendinning]

Matt, DMB,

DMB suggested.
"a digression, a diversion or even an excuse to avoid the actual
substance and meaning of radical empiricism."

In a way large chunks of the recent dialogue between the two of you
has seemed like this recently. You've both (we've all) been on
learning curves, but see this as part of the US pragmatist tradition,
which has crossed paths with the Greeks and mysticism along the way
.... It's good to recap and recall the large measures of common ground
and a return to what is important.

Some months ago I captured one snippet of dialogue between you that I
felt did (almost) settle on an understanding of "radical empiricism" -
part of my own learning curve.

Recently we got close with "immediate" and "pre-conceptual"
experience. (I find "pure" unhelpful.)

One issue with arriving at a working understanding is "time" and the
problem that as a word "immediate" can have a temporal element, as
well as a proximal sense. Matt you did advertise you were going to say
something on time here - once we had overcome the immediate vs
evolutionary historical perspectives ?

Another issue is the "intellectual" confusion for some ... that being
maybe "pre-intellectual" is a deliberate thoughtful "intellectual"
choice, not a denial of the intellect in favour of the social &
biological. Just intellect recognizing it's own limitations, and when
to hold back on the analytical bent.

Shall I dig out that old snippet, or can you continue to build ?
Regards
Ian


On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:48 PM, david buchanan<dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Matt said to dmb:
> When I see you saying things quite contentedly that a year before you were hammering me for saying, I find that frustrating.
>
> dmb replies:
> Why would something like that frustrate you? I would be flattered by that. Doesn't it mean that I'm learning something, maybe even learning it from you?
>
>