File spoon-archives/bhaskar.archive/bhaskar_1996/96-09-26.073, message 89


Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 15:48:10 +0200 (IST)
From: amit ron <amitr-AT-post.tau.ac.il>
Subject: internal relations - again




I must admit I fell somewhat uneasy about the internality/externality
debate. I have some questions to the participants in this debate, and I
will be happy to receive your opinions. 

 What is the purpose of attributing internality / externality to a
relation. What knowledge do we earn by knowing that husband / wife is
internal relation. I think part of the debate that was going on is due to
different positions toward this question. I want to suggest two positions
about this question. 

A. Attributing internality to a relation give us a description of the
causal powers between the participants as long as they take part in this
relatively enduring relationship. According to this position the
internality / externality is a real attribution
 of the relationship. 

B. Although the relations we are talking about are real, the attribution
of internality / externality is a description of our knowledge of the
relationship. To describe a relation as internal is to say that for
describing some phenomenon, we can not look at A only, but we must look at
B also. To say that a Husband wife relation is internal is to say that for
describing his actions as husband we must acknowledge that a wife exists.

Every phenomenon has some connection to other phenomenon. There is know
phenomenon that is completely external. The question is if for certain
purpose we have to describe this phenomenon with relation for other
phenomena. Bhaskar gives an example of two people who cross each other at
a crossroads (or something like that, it is in PON). Now, it is possible
to describe each man without relating it to the other man, and so the
connection between them is external. But maybe, or even probably, deeper
analysis will reveal an internal relation between them. 

To summarize, every two phenomena are somehow related to each other and so
ontologically internal. The question is if for our a certain purpose of
describing it, we need to relate it to another phenomenon, and those
making them internal. 

I will be glad to hear comments.

Amit Ron
Tel Aviv University




   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005