[MD] John Carl's Critique of Pure Experience. Inst02

Sun Jul 26 10:48:06 PDT 2009

But you wanna disagree with the state of non-conceptualized experience?  

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of John Carl
Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 1:16 PM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] John Carl's Critique of Pure Experience. Inst02

Nah... I don't wanna.

On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 8:09 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

>
> John,
>
> The MoQ states that experience comes before conceptualizing self and
> object,
> do you disagree with this?
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of John Carl
> Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2009 7:25 PM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] John Carl's Critique of Pure Experience. Inst02
>
> Not if you define concepts by experience... how could there be?
>
> On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 2:04 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > John,
> >
> > Are you saying that you to not believe there is experience that is
> > non-conceptual?
> >
> >
> > Marsha
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> > [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of John Carl
> > Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2009 4:31 PM
> > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> > Subject: [MD] John Carl's Critique of Pure Experience. Inst02
> >
> > Kreug]
> >
> >
> > And therefore all philosophical reflection, as an intellectual movement
> > away
> > from a more concrete analysis into abstract conceptual analysis,
> invariably
> > must return "...back once again to the *same practical common-sense* of
> our
> > starting point, the pre-philosophic attitude with which we originally
> > confront the visible world" if it is to remain faithful to our lived
> > experience.3<
> > http://williamjamesstudies.press.illinois.edu/1.1/krueger.html#
> > _ftn3>
> >
> >
> >
> > John]
> >
> >
> > But...but...but... what if our "common sense starting point" is as
> abstract
> > as concrete?   What I mean is, what if this latching onto the one
> > "concrete"
> > thing you can grasp is just as much an intellectual abstraction taken on
> > faith as the most soaring idealistic conceptions?  Then preferring the
> > concrete to the abstract is just a preference for minutiae.
> >
> >
> > Kreuger]
> >
> >
> >
> > It is in concrete experience that the world as given, within the
> > "aboriginal
> > flow of feeling" that is the "much-at-onceness" of pre-conceptual
> > phenomenal
> > experience, that we discern the deeper features of reality-such as
cause,
> > continuity, self, substance, activity, time, novelty, and
> > freedom.4<
> > http://williamjamesstudies.press.illinois.edu/1.1/krueger.html#_ft
> > n4>This
> > "pre-philosophic" attitude through which we initially face the world
> > is
> > captured in James's development of the concept of "pure experience" as
> the
> > foundation of his radical empiricism.
> >
> >
> > John]
> >
> >
> > So the deeper features of reality are discerned in the pre-phenomenal
> > experience.  Cause is pre-phenomenal.  Self is pre-phenomenal.
>  Substance,
> > activity, time, novelty and freedom are all "out there", waiting to be
> > discovered and used.  It's just asinine.  Pirsig describes it that way
> > exactly.
> >
> >
> > Every time "something" happen in my experience, my brain fires off some
> > kind
> > of electrochemical response.  It might be as noticeable as a hot stove
or
> > as
> > subtle as a butterfly's kiss.  I get some kind of response in my
> organistic
> > being from the outside world.  When this happens, I often get a formal
> > pattern that falls into my category of "known concept".  Sometimes it's
> not
> > recognizable but I  still call it a  concept - content of consciousness.
> > I
> > might not have a word for it, which means I'll probably have a hard time
> > remembering it or sorting it or intellectualizing about it, but
something
> > happens, some definite pattern falls under the purview of my mind.  You
> can
> > spend your time analyzing how this happens, what sort of patterns emerge
> > and
> > give them all kinds of labels... but the one label that does not fit,
> that
> > does not make any sense whatsoever is "pre-conceptual experience".
Such
> a
> > self-deluded idea as the basis for a metaphysics is ludicrous.
> >
> >
> > He must be using "concept" differently than "brain wave pattern" the way
> I
> > do.   Which I think is a shame, because you can really get hung up on
> words
> > if you don't differentiate between word-concepts (known intellectual
> > patterns) and thought-concepts. (content of consciousness)
> >
> >
> > Krueger]
> >
> > *5*
> >
> >    James's brand of radical empiricism therefore looks to ground his
> > empirical philosophy on the raw material of experience as given. Of this
> > methodological principle he writes: "The postulate is that the only
> things
> > that shall be debatable among philosophers shall be things definable in
> > terms drawn from
> > experience."5<
> > http://williamjamesstudies.press.illinois.edu/1.1/krueger.html
> > #_ftn5>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > John]
> >
> >
> > To a philosopher, it's all debatable -  the definable and the
indefinable
> > alike.   What's not experience?  Just because it occurs only in my mind,
> is
> > that not an "experience"?    Perhaps the only "pure" experience we can
> > realize is that purely in our minds.  Thus "terms drawn from experience"
> > can
> > be shortened to "terms".    True, albeit tautologically.
> >
> >
> >
> > Kreuger]
> >
> >
> > James was suspicious of the idea that conceptual or propositional
thought
> > functions as the primitive-and thus irreducible-interface between self
> and
> > world.   On this conceptualist or "intellectualist" line, as James
refers
> > to
> > it, all thinking and experience involves concepts. No concepts, no
> > experience.
> >
> >
> > John]
> >
> >
> > I guess I must be an "intellectualist" because that's the way I define
> > "concept" - any thought or experience or brainwave pattern.
> >
> >
> > Kreuger]
> >
> >
> > James instead argues that the phenomenal content of embodied experience
> *as
> > experienced* outstrips our capacity to conceptually or linguistically
> > articulate it.
> >
> >
> > John]
> >
> > He's saying the we experience a lot that we don't consciously
experience?
> >  Ok, I got no problem with that.  Just don't call it a concrete
> foundation
> > is all.
> >
> >
> > Kreuger]
> >
> >
> > In other words, James insists that many of our basic experiences
> > harbor *non-conceptual
> > content*. That is, many of our experiences have a rich phenomenal
content
> > that is too fine-grained and sensuously detailed to lend itself to an
> > exhaustive conceptual
> > analysis.7<
> > http://williamjamesstudies.press.illinois.edu/1.1/krueger.html#_f
> > tn7>
> >
> >
> >
> > John]
> >
> >
> >  Exhaustive conceptual analysis can be exhausting, like trying to count
> how
> > many hypothesis can dance on the pins of your head -  an infinity of
> them,
> > is the answer.  So?  Like trying to quantify the ten thousand things.
> >  Don't
> > go there.
> >
> >
> > "Non-conceptual content" is a concept that has no content.  I can see
> that
> > this is going to have to be continued.  Where did you guys get this guy?
> > 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/