File spoon-archives/bhaskar.archive/bhaskar_2003/bhaskar.0312, message 155


Subject: Re: Re[4]: BHA: Structures are not things that are true or false,even if  Hegelian Marxists say so
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:36:04 -0000


I understand your point Gunter but it eldies the significance of the initial
interpretation for the semantics of mirage - by definition a mirage is a
variable interpretation or construction of human based desire or
intentionality out of a natural phenomenon (otherwise it is simply a more
passive (not totally passive) sensze data experience (like the rainbow) -
the role of cognition is quite different - if it were not we would not have
a term mirage - we would simply refer to heat a) somthing like heat hazes
that we view or b) something like heat exhaustion that we experience. It is
importantin analytical terms that we experience mirages variably in a way
that we donot (in quite the same way) experience rainbows (we may interpret
the significanc eof rainbows in different ways but two equiovelant minds are
producing sense data images of the same kind from that experience - they are
simply cutting it up in different ways. To ignore this distinction is not to
be realist by stating actuaklly alls we are seeing is a mirage - the natural
phenomenon - it is to elide the equally realist aspects of mind  taht are
significant both to SEPM and to taking seriously as a staring point in
explaining phenomena - their hermentuic aspects - effectiverly you are
arguing for a structuralism without one important aspect of the human that
we must start from before we can get tp explanatory critique and the
possibility of better explanation (that it is actually an illusion)

Jamie

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "GŁnter Minnerup" <g.minnerup-AT-unsw.edu.au>
To: "jamie morgan" <bhaskar-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 12:05 AM
Subject: Re[4]: BHA: Structures are not things that are true or false,even
if Hegelian Marxists say so


Dear jamie,

on Thursday, 11 December 2003, you wrote:

> there is a definite if subtle analytical diustinction


I don't see thr distinction - unless, of course, we are using the word
"mirage" differently. For me, like "rainbow", it simply describes the
environmental phenomenon. Does it entail the illusion of water for you? It
doesn't for me: I quite frequently encounter mirages when travelling in the
Australian outback. If any of my passengers said to me "look, there's a
lake", I'd reply "no it's a mirage".

Regards,
GŁnter

-- 
GŁnter Minnerup
School of History
University of New South Wales
Sydney NSW 2052
Tel. (+61 2) 9385 3668 (work)
Tel. (+61 2) 9398 3646 (home)
mailto:g.minnerup-AT-unsw.edu.au



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



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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005