Re: realist-rationalist quad

From: Mark Mills (mmills@htcomp.net)
Date: Wed Feb 14 2001 - 00:35:30 GMT

  • Next message: lhousego@axa.com.au: "Re: realist-rationalist quad"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id AAA18138 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:41:07 GMT
    Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010213181945.020c5860@pop3.htcomp.net>
    X-Sender: mmills@pop3.htcomp.net
    X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
    Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 18:35:30 -0600
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    From: Mark Mills <mmills@htcomp.net>
    Subject: Re: realist-rationalist quad
    In-Reply-To: <3A89C98C.48C1161F@wehi.edu.au>
    References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010213171356.021086f0@pop3.htcomp.net>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    John,

    At 10:55 AM 2/14/01 +1100, you wrote:
    >Bear in mind that these are polar, not discrete, options.

    ? Not sure I understand. I changed the website
    (http://www.htcomp.net/markmills/real-rational.htm) to look more polar, but
    I doubt this is what you mean by polar and discrete.

    > This describes
    >a field of positions that may be occupied in degrees rather than kind.

    Are you saying it is impossible to 100% realist and 100% rationalist at the
    same time?

    It seems to be that one or the other must be primary at any given
    moment. It seems like a matter of methodology. Does one start with
    rational intuition? Does one start with refined sensual data (realism)?
    One has to start somewhere.

    >Moreover, there may not be equilibrium states (see David Lewis'
    >_Conventions_ for a description of these) but rather some sort of
    >chaotic attractors so that the most stable position is something like
    >pragmatist realism but not entirely.

    Pragmatic realism... hm, where is that on the quad? 90% realism, 30%
    rationalism? Given my 'first steps' metaphor, 90 steps toward enhanced
    sensual data and 30 towards rational understanding? And of course, does
    this have anything do to with epistemology?

    >How you could determine this I am
    >not sure. Perhaps it could be modelled and then tested against observations.

    That sounds interesting. Did any ideas come to mind?

    Mark

    http://www.htcomp.net/markmills

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 14 2001 - 00:43:15 GMT