[MD] chariotness

[X Acto]

> 
> Carl:
> I know what a Categorical Imperitive is, but I'm not sure I know the
> difference between existentialist and pragmatist thought. Should they be
> seperate "schools" or not? Anyway, enough for now.
> 
> 
> Ron:
> Existentialists tend to think that existence really doesent have meaning 
except
> what the individual
> attributes to it and Pragmatists tend to think that existence is nothing but
> meaning.

Carl:
So an existentialist would look at a banana and say, "That is food," whereas a 
pragmatist would look at a banana and say, "That is a banana?" To a pragmatist 
it is all res ipso facto, (the existence of the thing proves itself) while an 
existentialist would take the attitude that it's only real if we say it's real? 



Ron:
Lets back up. I think the question is enlarging the initial inquirey once we 
introduce a specific
analogie.With that said, the last portion of your post, the more abstract and 
general portion
comes closer by the notion of what we mean by the term "real', do we mean 
intellectual 

definitions, "if we say it is" or do we mean physical experience, this is the 
largest distinction
in regard to empiricism vs. rationalism. I think Existentialism is more of a 
"meta"-rationalism
myself but you may have your own reservations.