From: "Marshall Feldman" <marsh-AT-URIACC.URI.EDU>
Subject: RE: BHA: RE: truth, truth and more truth
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:44:27 -0400


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.


Hi Colin,

You said,

> I'm using Eudora Light 3 (on my laptop) and I got your italics fine.
> Unfortunately, the text was only about 8 (if this makes any sense -
> although i notice now I'm replying to it it's normal size -
> 12) i'm trying
> out a demo version Eudora Light 4 at work (which is the one
> that does the
> italics and much more) and i'll let you know how they come
> out on that.

It should be good with EL4. It's interesting how the technology changes the
meaning attached to the written word.

>
> On the practical adequacy bit. It's been some time since I
> read it, but I
> wonder how close to pragmatism sayer is with this notion?

Somewhere I read (I think in Novack's Pragmatism versus Marxism),
"Pragmatism is as pragmatism does." So it's really hard to figure out where
pragmatism is on any question. It does seem to me, however, that people like
James had a notion somewhat similar to Sayer's. The problem I've always had
with pragmatism is that many of its claims make perfect sense in the context
of science and scientific discovery, but pragmatists seem to transfer such
results to questions of politics and society at large without paying
sufficient attention to the differences associated with the new venue. It's
perfectly reasonable that (1) pragmatism would warrant certain claims about
science, that (2) based on such claims we would develop a scientific
understanding of politics, and that (3) based on this understanding conclude
that pragmatism's claims do not apply to politics. Most pragmatists I've
read jump from (1) to (3) without thinking about (2).

Good to hear from you.

        Marsh

HTML VERSION:

Hi Colin,

You said,

> I'm using Eudora Light 3 (on my laptop) and I got your italics fine.
> Unfortunately, the text was only about 8 (if this makes any sense -
> although i notice now I'm replying to it it's normal size -
> 12) i'm trying
> out a demo version Eudora Light 4 at work (which is the one
> that does the
> italics and much more) and i'll let you know how they come
> out on that.

It should be good with EL4. It's interesting how the technology changes the meaning attached to the written word.

>
> On the practical adequacy bit. It's been some time since I
> read it, but I
> wonder how close to pragmatism sayer is with this notion?

Somewhere I read (I think in Novack's Pragmatism versus Marxism), "Pragmatism is as pragmatism does." So it's really hard to figure out where pragmatism is on any question. It does seem to me, however, that people like James had a notion somewhat similar to Sayer's. The problem I've always had with pragmatism is that many of its claims make perfect sense in the context of science and scientific discovery, but pragmatists seem to transfer such results to questions of politics and society at large without paying sufficient attention to the differences associated with the new venue. It's perfectly reasonable that (1) pragmatism would warrant certain claims about science, that (2) based on such claims we would develop a scientific understanding of politics, and that (3) based on this understanding conclude that pragmatism's claims do not apply to politics. Most pragmatists I've read jump from (1) to (3) without thinking about (2).

Good to hear from you.

        Marsh