Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 01:58:11 +0100 (CET)
From: janstr-AT-chan.nl (Jan Straathof)
Subject: Re: Re BHA: Dialectic:the Pulse of Freedom Ch. 2.3


Hi Louis, you wrote:

>Howard,
>
>You argue:
>
>"So I don=EDt see why contradiction is not a feature of all things.  Because
>of finitude the only way to understand anything is in terms of what it is
>not and any given thing is always in relation to what it is not."
>
>The conclusion really does not follow, does it?  The conclusion
>(contradiction is a feature of all things) is ontological, but the premiss
>(the only way to UNDERSTAND anything is in terms of what it is not) is
>epistemological.  So aren't you projecting onto the world something that is
>based on how we (allegedly) understand the world - the ontic fallacy?

but aren't you meaning the"epistemic fallacy" here, viz. the reduction of
being (here: 'contradiction is a feature of all things') to our knowledge of
being (here: our 'way to UNDERSTAND anything') ??

jan (puzzled)




     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---