From: nuala.quinn-AT-dtn.ntl.com Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 13:17:26 +0100 Subject: BHA: Re: replying to Pat was Re: Thoughts on ((T)D))CR and Kulchur was Re: Hi Gary, thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts, always fascinating. I have looked at a few introductions to critical realism, will have a look at Colllier though. Thanks again. Gary MacLennan wrote: > > At 10:12 23/09/00 +0100, you wrote: > >Gary, > > > >please don't ignore my ignorance! But i am interested... all of these > >names...'alethia'... all of these schools of thought. How did u get into > >it? Is the argument everything? Why are u here writing about critical > >realism (in such an accomplished way0? > >:) > >pat quinn > > Hi Pat, > > My path into Critical Realism began with my reading the late Michael > Sprinker's article on the Royal Road to Science (?) in New Left Review > about 1993. Since then I have gone repeatedly through all of Bhaskar's > books with varying degrees of understanding. At that time I was totally > isolated politically and intellectually. Becoming part of the Critical > Realist movement has been a wonderful solution to all that. > > The best intro to Critical Realism IMHO is still via Andrew Collier. Begin > there and then dive in. > > As to why I post on this list, well the Bhaskar list is home to some of > the most brilliant minds that I have met. Moreover, as I teach at a > university where there is the customary academic dislike of abstract > thought and radical ideas, being on this list and going to the Critical > Realist conferences have been truly exciting experiences for me. > > As for Alethia that makes its debut as a concept in Bhaskar's Dialectic: > The Pulse of Freedom. It is the fourth level of Bhaskar's four part model > of truth. The First level is called the normative-fiduciary level.` I > call this the communicative level. It means that when I speak what I claim > to be the truth I am asking someone to trust me and to believe me. the > second level is epistemological. I have discovered and articulated the > truth. It has become part of knowledge. As such it can be mistaken or can > be superseded. this is known as epistemological relativism and those who > accuse Bhaskar of wanting to be a world historical figure or guru would do > well to ponder on his commitment to epistemic relativism. > > The third level of truth is ontological. It has an absolute dimension to > it. As Hobsbawm says, Elvis is either dead or he is not. > > At the fourth level we get to truth or alethia as the reason for > things. This is extremely controversial and by no means a simple > notion. I like to explain it through reference to neuroleptic > medication. We know these medications can have an effect on > schizophrenia. But we do not know why. They bind to certain receptors in > the brain and interfere with the take up of chemicals such as dopamine and > serotonin. But they also increase the uptake of glutamate and may also > have an anti-viral effect. In addition there are some 20% of the > schizophrenia sufferers who receive no benefit from the current crop of > drugs. So the earlier notion that schizophrenia is due to an excess of > dopamine for instance has not been established. In other words we have not > achieved alethia or the reason why the drugs have a (partial) efficacy) nor > have we achieved alethia in terms of the causes of schizophrenia. > > Finally all of the above is of course subject to argument! BTW you ask > whether I was here for the argument. No one who knows me would even > suspect that I simply argue for the sake of argument. > > Would I argue just to argue? Never! > Not ever? > Well, hardly ever. > > warm regards > > Gary > > --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005