[lit-ideas] Re: Train Your Character: The Olshewsky 3-Step Method (AUTONOMY guaranteed)

  • From: wokshevs@xxxxxx
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 15:42:05 -0230

I wouldn't know where to begin untangling the conceptual confusions and illicit
attributions present in the interpretation of my position on autonomy as a
possible character disposition that you provide below. 

Walter O.
MUN

P.S. Your spelling of my name is still incorrect.

P.P.S. If I'm willing to wager my Volvo, why assume the possibility that I once
had a Volvo but no longer do?



Quoting Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx:

> Walter O. has (or had) a Volvo. 
>  
> I was just quoting his dialogue with Mikhail Gearison (in the  archives):
>  
> GEARY: Do you believe in autonomous human  beings?
> OLSHEWSKY: As a character disposition, yes.
> GEARY: You go over my head. I am trained as a musician.
>  
> ------
>  
> >would wager my Volvo that I have never in my entire life ever stated  or
> >believed that "a human being is a character disposition."
> 
> But then, aren't you saying, 
>  
>                "I believe in _autonomous human beings_ where _autonomy_ is 
> understood _only_ as  a 'character disposition' of the aforementioned human 
> being.
>  
> SPERANZA: So you are saying that some human beings are autonomous and  some 
> other human beings are _not_ autonomous. And that what makes a human being  
> _worth_ being a human being -- her autonomy -- is something that just  
> _accidentally supervenes_ on her. And you are also saying that what makes a 
> human being 
> a human being _is_ a disposition, not of the human being, but of the  
> _character_ of the human being. So you are saying that a human being can lack
>  
> autonomy, yet have a _character_ (I disagree there), which is or is not 
> _disposed_ 
> to deliver autonomous acts. All very confusing, if you ask me. I just  think
> 
> it all sums up to your idea that what really matter is the fickle 
> disposition 
> of _some_ human beings (those whose character is disposed to allow  them to
> be 
> autonomous). I never heard anything so sacrilegous in the whole story  of 
> Western (and Middle Eastern) philosophy (before).
>  
> Cheers,
>  
> JL
> 
> JL
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
> 



------------------------------------------------------------------
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: