[MD] Metaphysics and the mystic.

[MarshaV]

Andre,

I agree with Mark.  Boring. I fail to see how mentioning one scholar saying W. James was 150 years ahead of his times is suppose to be more than slightly interesting.


Marsha



Sent from my iPad

On Feb 3, 2012, at 2:28 PM, Andre <andrebroersen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Mark to dmb...(or is it William James?):
> 
> James is a bit dated in his revelations, imo. He is stuck in that "good ol' psychology of the stone age.  A bit stuck in his thinking as it were. And who can blame him, he's dead.  Not much going on in that pretty little head of his right now, is there?  Seems pretty damn stuck to me!  We do not have to be stuck in a dead man's brain, unless we want to be.  I suppose it is pretty quite there, which may be
> comforting.  Not all the strife of new ideas going on which can threaten our security.  Not the W. James of old, he has been tamed.
> 
> Andre:
> I am a bit disturbed by this type of macabre assessment of the insights one of the most important, brilliant and influential philosophers this (Western) world has produced.
> 
> To suggest his ideas reflect a stuck-ness in psychology because he is dead ( organically Mark... obviously not his intellectual contributions as perhaps it could be stated that 'modern' psychology has not taken heed of William James' insights) is not very tasteful.
> 
> Perhaps you, Mark, can enlighten us on the progress psychology has made since William James. And I am not talking about new, fancy words and lovely new draping/syrup on old discoveries. I am talking about insights which have produced refreshingly new perspectives on those which, as you suggest, William James either neglected, was ignorant of or which have been regarded as absolutely stupid and/or'dated'.
> 
> 
> 
> 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