[MD] Emptiness & Quantum Mechancics

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 2:40 PM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> dmb quoted William James:
> ... True ideas lead us into useful verbal and conceptual quarters as well as directly up to useful sensible termini. They lead to consistency, stability and flowing human intercourse. They lead away from excentricity and isolation, from foiled and barren thinking."
>
>
> John replied:
> Now tha's what I'm talkin' about. Write on dave,
>
>
>
> dmb says:
>
> I'm flattered that you could confuse my writing with James's. (Rorty said he'd give his right arm to write like James.)

Dan:
Yes, I think John has been into the wacky backy again... he confused
me with Robert Pirsig, and I am flattered too. Still...

dmb:
The problem is that you're still trying to defend Absolute Idealism
without understanding the meaning of those terms. I mean, you seem to
be defending "The Absolute" as if it just meant "total", "unqualified
or "unrestricted". You're using it as an adjective, as in "the
absolute truth" or "their absolute authority". In philosophy, however,
"The Absolute" is a noun. It is a divine metaphysical entity. You're
doing the same thing with the term "ideal". As an adjective, it just
means whatever is most suitable or desirable, the most perfect example
of what we'd like from a thing or situation. But in philosophy,
Idealism is the view that reality is fundamentally mental or spiritual
and it's usually opposed to realism and physicalism.
>
> Now look, John. You continue to misuse these central terms despite my attempts to explain what they mean. You take my appeals to dictionaries and encyclopedia as some kind of academic elitism and authoritarianism, as snobbery and insult. I think that's not just unreasonable, it's also a little bit nuts. How can I take your love of Absolute Idealism seriously if you're using inappropriate definitions of both "Absolute" and "Idealism"?  You literally don't know what you're saying!
>
> You don't have to take my word for it. If you're reading this on computer then there are many explanations right at your fingertips. Just go look it up and find out for yourself.  It's simply impossible to talk about Absolute Idealism with me or anyone else if you don't understand the philosophy behind the label. You can't derive an understanding that philosophy from the adjectives "absolute" and "ideal".
>
> Imagine a philosophical essay titled "In Defense of Scientific Materialism". Now imagine you started reading it and quickly discover that the author is making a case for high-tech fabrics, synthetic wool or the futuristic aesthetic of some new fashion designer. Imagine he was a member of this group who mistook Pirsig's opposition to scientific materialism as a stance against synthetic cloth and a certain trend among runway models. Imagine you tried to set him straight by quoting Pirsig and the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and he hated you for it. That's pretty much how I see the situation with you and Absolute Idealism. My help doesn't help and I get abused for trying.
>
>
> Wikipedia has a page on Absolute Idealism and "Pragmatism" has it's own little section in the "criticisms" section:
>
> "Particularly the works of William James and F.C.S. Schiller, both founding members of pragmatism, made lifelong assaults on Absolute Idealism. James was particularly concerned with the monism that Absolute Idealism engenders, and the consequences this has for the problem of evil, free will, and moral action. Schiller rather attacked Absolute Idealism for being too disconnected with our practical lives, and that its proponents failed to realize that thought is merely a tool for action rather than for making discoveries about an abstract world that fails to have any impact on us.
> Absolute idealism has greatly altered the philosophical landscape. Paradoxically, (though, from a Hegelian point of view, maybe not paradoxically at all) this influence is mostly felt in the strong opposition it engendered. Both logical positivism and grew out of a rebellion against Hegelianism prevalent in England during the 19th century. Continental phenomenology, existentialism and post-modernism also seek to 'free themselves from Hegel's thought'. Martin Heidegger, one of the leading figures of Continental philosophy in the 20th century, sought to distance himself from Hegel's work. One of Heidegger's philosophical themes was "overcoming metaphysics"."
>
>
> The founders of pragmatism "made lifelong assualts on Absolute Idealism".
> Pirsig identifies the MOQ with pragmatism and denies that his Quality is some kind of intellectualized Absolute.
>
> Therefore the MOQ can be seen as a kind of Absolute Idealism?
>
>
> Please.

Dan:

In LILA'S CHILD, Robert Pirsig states that philosophic idealism would
help give a better handle on the MOQ. The way I understand it, he
feels that scientific materialism is the prevailing cultural thinking
in present day Western culture, but philosophic idealism was the
prevailing thought during Victorian times. He isn't saying that the
MOQ is to be identified with idealism, but rather both idealism and
materialism are needed to form a more complete understanding with the
MOQ.

Thank you,

Dan