[lit-ideas] Re: Transcendental and otherwise

  • From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 19:51:40 -0600

Oh, great, now you tell us. I'd just finished writing a 12 page rebuttal of your post, demolishing your argument and taking to task your understanding of Rorty, all based on your "with reflects". Now I learn it was all for naught. 


It was brilliant, btw.

Mike Geary
Memphis
----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Paul" <rpaul@xxxxxxxx> 
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 6:12 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Transcendental and otherwise



Yesterday I wrote
He rejects it (in PATMON) via rejecting what he sees as a traditional view got from Descartes (and common, I'd say, to many philosophers) that the mind is some sort of surface or mirror with reflects (and somehow retains its reflections of) the world outside it. 

Should be 'which reflects.'

RP
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html 

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

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 01-2008