From: "Tobin Nellhaus" <nellhaus-AT-gwi.net> To: <bhaskar-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU> Subject: Re: BHA: Non-experimental science (was "What must the ...") Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 17:32:45 -0400 Okay, I'm back from hiding. Checking back on my e-mail I see the discussion has developed a bit farther, and I don't think I can quite catch up; ah well. One point that might be relevant, however, is that (as I think Ruth noted earlier) in *Dialectic* Bhaskar attempts to derive critical realism *without* grounding it in the natural sciences or experimentation. Does that make it an *a priori* philosophy, in Louis's phrase? Somehow I don't think so, though I'm not sure I have the background in philosophy to say for sure. But I must admit, the position Louis, Marshall et al have staked out--if I understand it correctly, that we must (in effect) re-demonstrate the validity of CR within every possible field of study--is troubling to me. It's like having to check every morning that the sun rises in the east and not in the northwest, a position which obviously sounds rather empiricist. Someone will have to clarify this for me, or explain what I've misconstrued this time. Ruth: sorry if I misunderstood your statements. As Confucius says, "Who say all those things they say I say?" --- Tobin Nellhaus nellhaus-AT-gwi.net "Faith requires us to be materialists without flinching": C.S. Peirce --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005