[lit-ideas] Re: "the space of reasons" from Morc Huck Pump
- From: "John McCreery" <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 09:39:19 +0900
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 9:08 AM, Robert Paul <rpaul@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> What I want to suggest is that all of these mental shenanigans occur
> after the deed is done, and that most practical reasoning, while
> perfectly agreeable when spelled out on the chalk board, is unfelt,
> unseen, and untasted before one acts. The addition of 'Therefore, I (or
> we) will do such-and-such,' is seldom present prior to action, and if it
> is it goes by so fast one seldom notices it.
>
This pragmatist finds himself in sympathy with Walter's objection that "a
reason on its own can never provide an argument." His example and his words
suggest to me that an argument requires the articulate use of language to
identify and bring into shared awareness at least one connection between a
reason and the action it purports to justify or the effect it purports to
explain. Thus, while I agree with Robert Paul that most practical reasoning
does, indeed, take place after the fact, the act itself being unconsidered
before it happens, it is precisely that lack of consideration that indicates
the lack of argument.
One might go further and observe that philosophical argument (as opposed,
for example, to bar room brawls) requires a modicum of agreement on what the
language used means and what its use implies. In the absence of such
agreement, one says A, the other says B, and, however elaborate the
construction of either A or B, no true argument occurs. As Terry Eagleton
wryly remarks about political debate, if we are discussing Patriarchy, by
which you mean a system of social domination in which men are superior to
women and I mean a small town in upstate New York, no debate [a.k.a.
argument] is occurring.
John
John McCreery
The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
Tel. +81-45-314-9324
http://www.wordworks.jp/
Other related posts:
