Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 11:13:42 -0500
Subject: Re: BHA: Emergence


Hi Mervyn,

I would like to distinguish between "trying to persuade" and "trying to 
convert."  I approve of one, but not of the other.

Dick

At 10:40 PM 03/28/2002 +0000, you wrote:
>Hi Dick
>
>Now that you remind me, isn't it about time you adopted the theory of
>alethic truth?! Seriously, I don't see anything wrong with trying to
>persuade, providing one is also willing to learn.
>
>I really appreciate your kind words.
>
>Mervyn
>
>
>
>Richard Moodey <moodey001-AT-mail1.gannon.edu> writes
> >Hi Mervyn,
> >
> >At 12:17 PM 03/27/2002 +0000, you wrote:
> >>Hi Tobin (and Marko, all)
> >>
> >>Re the social construction thing: Marko is a newcomer to the list who
> >>was attracted to Bhaskar via Chomsky's naturalism. He found what he took
> >>to be Bhaskar's and CR's social constructionism offputting. Instead of
> >>pointing out the important differences between pomo etc constructionism
> >>and CR's position, the response has by and large been to assert social
> >>construction and attack Marko's reductionism (which btw I have *not*
> >>defended). At least, that's the way I saw it. I, frankly, am interested
> >>in retaining Marko's interest in CR, and of course such an interest is
> >>redundant in the case of other discussants who are veteran addicts.
> >
> >As another relative newcomer to the list, I really appreciate your efforts
> >help us newcomers feel welcome.  I believe that Marko, like myself, has
> >important relationships to other communities of discourse.  While my
> >disagreements with some of the taken-for-granted assumptions of most
> >listers are different from Marko's, I do have some.  I believe that Marko,
> >like me, probably is in touch with other folks who support him in some of
> >his "deviant" positions.
> >
> >Unlike Marko (I think), I am much more interested in clarifying my own
> >thinking than I am in making converts.  I am very comfortable with agreeing
> >to disagree, even about very fundamental issues.  Mervyn, you and I
> >disagree in a very important way about whether "alethic truth" really
> >should be called "truth" at all.   I don't expect to change your mind, and,
> >at least for the time being,  you have quit trying to convince me of the
> >error of my ways.
> >
> >Convivially,
> >
> >Dick
> >
>
>
>      --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---




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