[MD] suspended in language

[Steven Peterson]

Hi Ian,


On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 2:43 AM, Ian Glendinning
<ian.glendinning at gmail.com> wrote:
> Matt, Marsha, Steve,
>
> I thought Matt was doing fine there .. up to the "hard-boiled contoversy" ...
>
> "It's what lied at the heart of the controversy between Booker T.
> Washington and W.E.B. DuBois--those were important times ... "
>
> ... at which point it did turn into one of Matt's essays / lectures
> ;-) (his grammatic style)
>
> But nothwithstanding the preservation of good aspects of philosophical
> traditions - Protagoras in this example - there is a point.
>
> When I said "total" I coud just as easily have said "absolute" - I was
> just varying the ... errr rhetoric ... to keep my brain cells alive -
> the "tapestry" as Matt would have it. The probem is the "hard-boiled
> disputes" - polarization of extreme opposites (excluded middles). How
> do we get past points of agreement when we agree to neither extreme
> ever being intended by anyone ? Neither absolute truth, nor absolute
> relativism ?
>
> Keep talking I guess.

Steve:
You've framed the issue as looking for middle ground between
absolutism and relativism. I think that is a mistake. I think we
should avoid the whole issue by avoiding foundationalism (objectivism
as Ron calls it). We deny the premise from which it makes sense to
ask, "is it absolute or relative? is the quality in the subject or the
object?"

Best,
Steve