Re: [quickphilosophy] Re: Countdown

  • From: wittrsl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • To: quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 11:09:02 -0700 (PDT)

Hi Walter, Budd, Neil, & rest of QP group:
Well, given my other obligations, I probably can't give the kind of regular, 
rapid input on difficult papers that Walter envisions for the group. I'm not 
saying it isn't rewarding; it is, but for me, it takes too much time to do it 
My experience with web philosophy chat rooms has been mixed--some good, some 
bad, some ugly. I've had some good exchanges in the Slow Reading groups, but 
after a while I realized that these folks were just basically Straussians, and 
that particular slant on ancient philosophy (to say nothing of their 
contemporary political theory!) I simply could not savor. Burnyeat said it all, 
and I do not wish them well.
And the ordeal of other exchanges was for me not good, not bad, but the other 
one. One person with whom I disagreed about the translation and interpretation 
of an ancient philosopher from Stagira managed to root out my personal 
information and threated to contact the university where I finished grad 
school in order to tell them that my academic credentials were faked. Amazing, 
huh? I put a clip on that stinky bag right away.
It's hard to cultivate good web interlocutors. Look at how difficult it has 
been for Prof. Wilson to stimulate his group into discussions of Wittgenstein, 
even though many of them are competent thinkers, one of them is outstanding 
(but ephemeral), most of them proclaim an almost fanatical loyalty to Witt's 
approach (so that's the prerequisite for this course), and Sean has done a 
remarkable job in assembling an attractive web platform for the group. What 
more can you do? Ha! maybe just go back to school and try to get a good grade 
in Epistemology 101.
So, that's kind of what I've been doing. I've been reading the modern 
reassessments of Descartes and the British empiricists: Yolton, Chappell, and 
Mackie on Locke; everybody on Descartes, but especially the renewed interest in 
modern skepticism where the commentary comes from Moore, Wittgenstein, Peter 
Strawson, McGinn, and Crispin Wright; Winkler and Grayling on Berkeley; and the 
New Hume Debate--fueled by one Galen Strawson, among others--which claims 
that the rotund Scot was, in a surprising fact for most of us that always 
thought he was a happy but skeptical dude, a realist about causal connections. 
I can't really set this aside.
But, I could continue in the group, basically commenting on Walt's posts, 
beginning with McTaggart, whom I've never read. And, I could blog on some of 
the above controversies on skepticism, causation, and the theory of ideas. I 
don't think anyone here is particularly interested in ancient philosophy, so, 
although I have some interlocutors on hand for that area, I'll leave them 
alone. There are some potential scholars that I could root out for the modern 
philosophy topic, though, and I might be able to draw them to this group...if 
it's OK to take that tack.
Sorry I can't do more. I still have to work a 9-to-7 job and some weekends, 
which is my source of gray hair, a flat butt, and money. And I have a certain 
hard-to-quantify commitment to Greek translation within the general area of 
Byzantine lexicography...if that makes any sense. Once these are tamped down on 
a week-to-week basis, I can funnel posts on the 20th century's commentary on 
the 18th century's philosophers. 
P.S. Why do we skip the 19th? Because of German Idealism?
--- On Sat, 10/23/10, gabuddabout <gabuddabout@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: gabuddabout <gabuddabout@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [quickphilosophy] Re: Countdown
To: quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Saturday, October 23, 2010, 1:17 PM


--- In quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "walto" <calhorn@...> wrote:
> --- In quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "gabuddabout" <gabuddabout@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "walto" <calhorn@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Ach, I just realized that if I blew up the group, we'd lose the archive. 
> > > I don't want to do that. So I guess I'll just let it fall into desuetude.
> > > 
> > > With not a bang, but a whimper...
> > > 
> > > W
> > 
> > Or you can continue with what you found fuzzy in the Fodor paper on 
> > Churchland..
> > 
> > Think of this list as quick but in slow motion, with occasional quantum 
> > jumps into quickland.
> > 
> > Like philosophy seems at times.
> > 
> > Budd
> >
> If I continue, I'm continuing with McTaggart!
> W

Well, you can always change your mind! Prove me wrong!


Other related posts:

  • » Re: [quickphilosophy] Re: Countdown - wittrsl