home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky sci.cognitive:649 sci.philosophy.tech:4137 sci.lang:8066 sci.philosophy.meta:2601
- Newsgroups: sci.cognitive,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.lang,sci.philosophy.meta
- Path: sparky!uunet!sun-barr!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!gatech!news.byu.edu!ux1!mica.inel.gov!guinness!garnet.idbsu.edu!holmes
- From: holmes@garnet.idbsu.edu (Randall Holmes)
- Subject: Re: Folk Theories of Meaning (was re: Theories of meaning not relying solely on sym)
- Message-ID: <1992Nov17.162830.22460@guinness.idbsu.edu>
- Sender: usenet@guinness.idbsu.edu (Usenet News mail)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: garnet
- Organization: Boise State University
- References: <1992Nov16.125741.22619@news.Hawaii.Edu> <1992Nov16.122343.17501@husc3.harvard.edu> <1992Nov17.134024.1624@sol.cs.wmich.edu>
- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 16:28:30 GMT
- Lines: 61
-
- In article <1992Nov17.134024.1624@sol.cs.wmich.edu> brewer@sol.cs.wmich.edu (Steve Brewer) writes:
- >In article <1992Nov16.122343.17501@husc3.harvard.edu>
- >zeleny@husc10.harvard.edu (Michael Zeleny) writes:
- >>
- >>If you don't feel that being bound by
- >>logic is a *moral* obligation, would you still have any basis for a
- >>reasonable expectation that your tooting your car's horn at a bunch of
- >>Samoan Hell's Angels does not *mean* your informed consent for them to
- >>peel off your skin and rip out your heart? Do you have a glimmer of
- >>understanding that your human rights are not worth the market value of
- >>the chemicals that comprise your anatomy, *if* there be no such things
- >>as matters of fact about meaning?
- >
- >It seems to me that this statement mixes several immiscible issues.
- >Let us remember that human rights are based on a *committment* to
- >logic. We shouldn't believe that logic is fundamentally 'right' or
- >something.
-
- If you do not believe that it is fundamentally right, you are not
- committed to it.
-
- Most evidence I've seen indicates that very few people
- >use logic or fundamentally rational thinking for most
- decision-making.
-
- Perhaps not explicitly, but they do use it implicitly (when they are
- making sensible decisions).
-
- >Miriam Solomon's paper on scientific validation suggests that the human
- >system, though illogical, may produce better results because of the
- >way knowledge construction occurs as a distributed system of dispersed
- >cognitive entities with different perspectives. The system provides
- >better for both diversity in the common conceptual ecology (if I can steal
- >that term) and less duplication of effort.
-
- What is the frame of reference in which he draws this conclusion?
- I'll bet that it presupposes logic.
-
- >
- >Furthermore, remember that a committment to logic is a *western* ideal
- >that is not going to be applicable in many areas of the world. In
- >many places, doing something seemingly innocuous *would* result in
- >having your skin peeled off. Do you believe that a simple lack of
- >commitment to western logic makes these value systems bad or wrong
- >somehow? I don't believe that such a viewpoint is supportable.
-
- Yes, it makes them wrong. Similar views held widely in the West
- itself are also wrong.
-
- >
- >--
- >Steven D. Brewer brewer@cs.wmich.edu * 99brewer@lab.cc.wmich.edu
- > Department of Science Studies, Western Michigan University
- >"Kiu regalas per ^stonoj, tiun oni dankas per bastonoj." D-ro L.L. Zamenhof
-
-
- --
- The opinions expressed | --Sincerely,
- above are not the "official" | M. Randall Holmes
- opinions of any person | Math. Dept., Boise State Univ.
- or institution. | holmes@opal.idbsu.edu
-