From: "Louis Irwin" <LIrwin1-AT-ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: BHA: DPF Reading ch 2.4 Contradictions: Misunderstandings
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 19:07:57 -0500


In relation to "RB's argument that there must be both sufficient stability
and sufficient differentiation & change for praxis, perception, and
identifiable entities to occur", Tobin asked what constitutes sufficiency.

Andy comments that "Tobin's question, 'is the requisite degree of
sufficiency established externally, say by God?', seems  apposite. RB wants
to say, in RTS and in DPF, that real essences (structures) cause change. Yet
he also wants to say, via his transcendental argument, that whatever else
happens, they don't all change too fast. Of course, it is no good pointing
to the fact that structures do not seem to have changed too fast in the
past - why can't there be an unknown structure about to fundamentally change
everything in the future? If we don't know all real essences and real
essences are the sole cause of change there seems no way of denying this
possibilty, except by resorting to some other agent of change or stability,
ie. God.

The answer, I think, is that the argument for sufficient differentiation and
change is transcendental.  Sufficient differentiation and change are
presuppositions for praxis, perception, and identifiable entities to occur,
so under Andy's hypothetical
scenario, these things would not be possible in the future.  A buzzing,
blooming confusion is always a future possibility, it just is not consistent
with our present experience.

Louis Irwin





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