[MD] Julian Baggini: This is what the clash of civilisations is really about
xacto at rocketmail.com
Wed May 27 05:27:35 PDT 2015
> On May 27, 2015, at 8:06 AM, Ron Kulp <xacto at rocketmail.com> wrote:
> Aristotle says something similar in book alpha of metaphysics, that we seek to render the unintelligible intelligible. We impose limit on experience in order to better understand it.
> I think that is different than a will for
> I think that's where some disagree
> With Royce.
> To add:
This rendering of wholes out of the many bits of experience is an artistic act so that it is a will toward greater
Meaning not so much a truth in terms
>> On May 25, 2015, at 5:00 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
>> dmb, all,
>>> On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 11:27 AM, david <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Baggini wrote:
>>> "The clash of civilisations is happening not between Islam and the West,
>>> as we are often led to believe, but between pragmatic relativism and
>>> dogmatic certainty."
>>> dmb says:
>>> We don't need Truth to be Objective, Fixed, Absolute, or Eternal and we
>>> can't have that kind of truth anyway. But we do need truth to be vigorous
>>> enough and strong enough to kill lies, bullshit, fanaticism, propaganda,
>>> honest mistakes and good old fashioned stupidity. We need excellence in
>>> thought and speech and ideas that actually work when they're put into
>> "The contrast is not one between intellectualism and pragmatism. It is the
>> contrast between two well-known attitudes of will, — the will that is loyal
>> to truth as an universal ideal, and the will that is concerned with its own
>> passing caprices.
>> And yet, despite all this, the modern assault upon mere intellectualism is
>> well founded. The truth of our assertions is indeed definable only by
>> taking account of the meaning of our own individual attitudes of will, and
>> the truth, whatever else it is, is at least instrumental in helping us
>> towards the goal of all human volition. The only question is whether the
>> will I really means to aim at doing something that has a final and eternal
>> All logic is the logic of the will. There is no pure intellect. Thought is
>> a mode of action, a mode of action distinguished from other modes mainly by
>> its internal clearness of self-consciousness, by its relatively free
>> control of its own procedure, and by the universality, the impersonal
>> fairness and obviousness of its aims and of its motives. An idea in the
>> consciousness of a thinker is simply a present consciousness of some
>> expression of purpose, — a plan of action. A judgment is an act of a
>> reflective and self-conscious character, an act whereby one accepts or
>> rejects an idea as a sufficient expression of the very purpose that is each
>> time in question. Our whole objective world is meanwhile defined for each
>> of us in terms of our ideas. General assertions about the meaning of our
>> ideas are reflective acts whereby we acknowledge and accept certain ruling
>> principles of action.
>> And in respect of all these aspects of doctrine I find myself at one with
>> recent voluntarism, whether the latter takes the form of instrumentalism,
>> or insists upon some more individualistic theory of truth. But for my part,
>> in spite, or in fact because of this my voluntarism, I cannot rest in any
>> mere relativism. Individualism is right in saying, "I will to credit this
>> or that opinion." But individualism is wrong in supposing that I can ever
>> be content with my own will in as far as it is merely an individual will.
>> The will to my mind is to all of us nothing but a thirst for complete and
>> conscious self-possession, for fullness of life. And in terms of this its
>> central motive, the will defines the truth that it endlessly seeks as a
>> truth that possesses completeness, totality, self-possession, and there
>> fore absoluteness."
>> J Royce - William James and other Essays on the Philosophy of Life
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
More information about the Moq_Discuss