[MD] Taking Words Seriously
MarshaV
valkyr at att.net
Sat Sep 10 22:36:03 PDT 2011
Dan & Matt,
There were two parts to my original post.
>>> Marsha:
>>> You make some very thoughtful points.
Marsha:
: I was suggesting that: If one held that there were such a difference (professional vs. amateur) than the points you (Dan) made were thoughtful, and I appreciate your care in providing them.
>>> Marsha:
>>> But I think of a philosopher as someone who is curious about the nature of Reality, or at least some aspect of Reality, not necessarily someone who has an opinion about everything. RMP was certainly a philosopher. I think, also, of his example of William James becoming interested in the relationships between squirrel, tree and observer is an excellent example. Getting underneath the obvious becomes an obsession. Anyway, here's a short few paragraphs I thought appropriate.
Marsha:
: _But_, here's a different view.
On Sep 10, 2011, at 5:45 PM, Dan Glover wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Matt Kundert
> <pirsigaffliction at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Marsha,
>>
>> Marsha said:
>> My alternative view is that the differentiation between professional
>> and amateur philosopher is just so much cultural clap-trap.
>>
>> Matt:
>> When one combines this formulation of your alternative with Ron's
>> observation that "every topic is cultural claptrap" (because, I take it,
>> everything to discuss is built out of our culture, i.e. static patterns)
>> and then Dan's iteration of the value of discussion despite that broad,
>> too-true fact, I think we can get the sense in which this formulation
>> isn't as preferable as your second formulation: "the differences are
>> not really a topic that interests me."
>>
>> For the second strikes me as perfectly reasonable: there are lots of
>> topics that don't interest me (one might say: that I'm incurious
>> about). However, the first formulation was, we might say,
>> dismissive of that topic. And I don't take it that we need to dismiss
>> everything that doesn't interest us, and further that dismissing is
>> exactly not what one amateur does to another: dismissing is what a
>> professional does when they find that something isn't relevant to the
>> discipline. But amateurs have no discipline, and so seemingly
>> should always take at most a non-dismissive non-interest in each
>> others work.
>>
>> Also, I agree that many attempts to differentiate between pro and
>> amateur are "so much cultural claptrap." However, that's why I take
>> an interest in trying to find a better way to state those differences
>> should they exist in a meaningful way. I'm not sure I've found any
>> yet, and I don't take it that thinking about it is necessary for one to
>> compose themselves as an amateur (i.e., I don't think it's necessary
>> for an amateur to be interested in this particular topic).
>
> Dan:
>
> Well, that tends to go without saying... it isn't necessary for anyone
> to be interested in any particular topic, be they professional or
> amateur. Professionals tend to be very narrow in their focus, homing
> in on their particular field of interest, while an amateur has the
> luxury of examining many topics of interest.
>
> I don't care that the topic isn't of interest to Marsha or to anyone.
> But I do wonder at her motives for answering my post and then
> summarily dismissing me when I attempted to engage her in discussion.
> If it isn't of interest, why bother me in the first place? I don't
> really care if I get any answers at all to my posts... I'm unsure if
> they're designed to illicit answers anyway. Most times I am merely
> musing to myself and I share my writings in the hope that others may
> find some small value there. Whether they answer or not is irrelevant.
> If someone does answer, though, I do make an attempt to answer them
> back if it seems called for.
>
> Anyway...
>
> Dan
Marsha:
My motive was simply to suggest a different point-of-view, without
wanting to engage in the debate. When pushed a little harder by Dan,
I rejected more adamantly.
Marsha
___
More information about the Moq_Discuss
mailing list