[lit-ideas] Re: The meaning of life
- From: wokshevs@xxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Eric Yost <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:20:11 -0330
Just a comment or two on Eric Y's assaults on the transcendental:
Quoting Eric Yost <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx>:
snip
> Someone else: Stating that "human life is a necessary
> condition of meaning" allows me to pretend to look down
> on the value systems of other people from an alleged
> transcendental perspective. That way, when somebody I
> disagree with talks about courage or integrity, I can
> smirk and say that all these terms are culture-based,
> provisional, or even adventitious illusions.
snip
Eric's interlocutor is a truly intriguing figure. Why would such a character
wish to "pretend to look down on ..." What prevents her from *really*
deprecating others' value systems on the grounds of her transcendental claim?
The second sentence uttered by Eric's interlocutor doesn't answer this
question; it only specifies an effect - a psychological sense of
self-satisfaction.
Another question: Why would the transcendental point of view - be it moral or
epistemic - necessarily deprecate conceptions of cultural virtue and
authenticity? Surely, "the good will," as articulated by Kant in his
*Groundwerk*, is emblematic of true virtue. And yet Kant is the
paradigm transcendentalist when it comes to morality. Does Eric aver that Kant
is somehow confused here? If so, on what grounds is that claim made?
Just one more question, if I may: How are we to understand the expression
"adventitious illusions"? Is it that some illusions are non-adventitious, in
that they are somehow essential, intrinsic and/or necessary? And, if so, what
would this latter kind of illusion look like?
Thanks to Eric for taking me places I rarely traverse.
Walter O
MUN
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
