John, Edwina, List: I am more than a bit surprised by the assertions that the Middle Ages gave birth to "Empirism".
Does anyone have a convenient reference to the historical emergence of this term in philosophy? Cheers Jerry Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 5, 2017, at 10:24 AM, Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> wrote: > > John: > > Agreed, empiricism started in the 'middle ages' - and my point is that no > 'thought-ideology' exists in a vacuum. Empiricism became an observable if > peripheral force in the 13th century, as did the shift towards empowering > individuals. > > I consider that philosophical ideologies do not exist in a vacuum but > co-exist with political ideologies. My point is which ones are dominant? > > No- I am not confusing societal 'logic' [??]....with scientific logic. [I > hate the term sociological for the abuses of thought found within so many > sociology treatises]... Philosophic ideology is not the same as scientific > logic. I am suggesting that a philosophical ideology is correlated with a > societal ideology - and that empiricism, which began at least to emerge in > open discourse in the 13th c, is correlated with the political ideology that > affirmed support for individual interaction with the world. > > I certainly agree: Peirce wasn't political at all. My point is only that HIS > analysis, with its three categories, works very well to disempower the > extremes of both empiricism and idealism. > > Edwina > ----- Original Message ----- > From: John Collier > To: Edwina Taborsky ; Peirce-L > Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2017 11:12 AM > Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - > > I don’t agree. Edwina. Empiricism started in the Middle ages and went through > periods of profound social transformation since while being changed > relatively little. > > I don’t think it is a political ideology. > > I think that confusing sociological and scientific logic with each together > leads to confusion, with which your post is rife. Much of what you say about > empiricism just strikes me as irrelevant, with multitude counterexamples I > won’t go into here except to note that empiricism co-existed with m any > political ideologies. > > I don’t think that Peirce was particularly political in his logic or > methodology, though I understand his politics tended to towards the > conservative. He didn’t write much about real political issues of his time, > and I doubt it was a major influence in his overall though. > > John Collier > Emeritus Professor and Senior Research Associate > Philosophy, University of KwaZulu-Natal > http://web.ncf.ca/collier > > From: Edwina Taborsky [mailto:tabor...@primus.ca] > Sent: Sunday, 05 February 2017 5:58 PM > To: John Collier <colli...@ukzn.ac.za>; Peirce-L <PEIRCE-L@LIST.IUPUI.EDU> > Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - > > I think that even a philosophical ideology , eg, the 'classic form of > empiricism', has to be grounded in the societal infrastructure. > > Political ideologies certainly must be grounded; I think it's an error to > say, for example, the 'democracy is the best political system', for any > political system must give political power to that section of the population > that produces wealth and so enables continuity of that society. If the > majority of the population are producing wealth, then, democracy is the most > functional political system. If only a minority are producing wealth [and > this was the case for most of mankind's economic history], then, democracy > would be dysfunctional. > > What about philosophical ideologies? Are they isolated from grounding in the > societal infrastructure? I've outlined my view of the enormous societal > impact of the rise of empiricism, which empowered ordinary individuals to > interact, as they saw fit, with the world. The slippery slope downside is > that it easily moves into the randomness of postmodern relativism and chaos. > > What about realism? How does it societally function? It removes the > individual from sole access to 'truth' and inserts a 'community of scholars'. > This removes randomness from the analysis. It posits a truth system based > around general rules, where individual articulations of these rules are just > that: individual and transient versions but almost minor in their real-life > power except as versions of those rules. This has its own slippery slope of > fundamental determinism and we've seen the results in many eras in our world > history, including modern times. > > Peirce dealt with this with his focus on the freedom of Firstness and his > view that the rules [Thirdness] evolve and adapt. This would enable a society > to have a rule of law, with local variations - something required in a > 'growth society' - i.e., a modern society as differentiated from a no-growth > or pre-industrial society. > > Edwina > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: John Collier > To: Jerry LR Chandler > Cc: Peirce List ; Eric Charles ; Helmut Raulien > Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2017 3:18 AM > Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - “The union of units unifies > the unity” > > Jerry, I think we are using ‘empiricism’ differently. I was using it in the > classic form, not just to refer to anyone who uses the natural world as a > touchstone for clarifying meaning and discovering the truth. I am an > empiricist in this latter sense, but not the former. > > > > ----------------------------- > PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON > PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu > . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu > with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at > http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm . > > > > > > ----------------------------- > PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON > PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu > . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu > with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at > http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm . > > > >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
