[MD] Philosophy and Abstraction

[118]

Hi Matt,
It is interesting how we view abstraction as something different from the
scene abstracted from.  I think this is something of an illusion, perhaps
provided by the concrete nature of books.  Certainly the abstraction is
somewhat simplified, but the process of abstraction is as real as any other
adventure in life; the process of abstraction is no different from
parachuting.  It is done in the moment and consuming of the present.
 Abstraction is an art just as much as playing the guitar.  Trying to
understand somebody else's abstraction may seem a bit removed.  But even
that is in real time like listening to a concert.

Mark

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Matt Kundert <pirsigaffliction at hotmail.com
> wrote:

>
> "I think at the heart of the difference between philosophers attracted
> to the classical pragmatists but repelled by Rorty is the thought that
> radical empiricism returns us to the scene of life, a counter to
> abstract philosophical sterilities. I can empathize with the
> formulation, to the idea of pragmatism "returning us to the scene of
> life," a formula I've grown fond of. However, what I think we should
> rather say in most cases, is that philosophy is abstract by nature--that's
> what it is--and returning to the scene of life is something that people
> need to figure out how to do, not necessarily philosophies, or other
> abstract activities. For instance, why would we necessarily want
> theoretical physics to do so? Philosophy is Dewey's indirect
> experience--returning to life is knowing, as Wittgenstein put it, when
> to put philosophy down."
>
> --from "Quine, Sellars, Empiricism, and the Linguistic Turn"
>
> http://pirsigaffliction.blogspot.com/2009/04/quine-sellars-empiricism-and-linguistic.html
>
> 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/md/archives.html
>