Monday, May 24, 2010

Thinking and Response

May 21, 2010, Friday: An insight on the train.
I was heading towards Center City Philadelphia and all of a sudden I had this thought, which I wrote down in the notebook I had with me, as follows:
"Thinking - of course - is response, responsiveness - and the philosophy of the West since Descartes is just a smokescreen.
Hence the moral act inherent in thinking -
Thinking - the spiritual organ of hearing"
________________
Not much, you say? Yes, not much. But I understood the little that it was in a new way. It seemed to crystallize something for me.
What is response? It is the inner or internal counterpart to what Robert Pirsig was exploring - that is, Quality. Response is our gesture to the "Quality" to the "Quality" in the world.
_______________________________
The terrible error of Western philosophy -- was to make thinking cognitive. To really see this - get a glimpse of it - is to begin to have a dim understanding of the magnitude of the error under whose dominion we have placed ourselves... hence our political servitude, our moral incoherence, our slavery to appetite, to words, to appearances..........
__________________________________
Indeed, it seems that the "progress" of Western thought increasingly led away from the concept of responsibility toward more and more thickets of intellectual abstraction. Is it any wonder that our cosmologists have followed in the same track? Western man lost the key to his own mind when he threw our honor and conscience -- those two qualities, according to Nikolai Levashov, which dispense with the need for "beliefs."
_____________________________________
There is probably a line of relation from "responsibility" to "participation" and back again. That is to say, that Owen Barfield wrote about "participation" in Saving the Appearances, tracing the idea from its classical form to its modern deterioration and diminishment and one may say, "derangement." But has there been any similar treatment of the concept of responsibility, philosophically speaking? The concept of Responsibility seems to have dropped off the precipice of theology, only to re-emerge shakily from the abyss in the form of war crimes trials and the like. Such books as The Nuremberg Fallacy (Eugene Davidson) are a monument to the lost or squandered possibilities of Western thought with respect to the issue of responsibility.
________________________________________________

I suspect that real understandings come slowly and in few words, after all.

__________________________________________________

I hope -- to be continued.

15 comments:

517SeritaG_Jamar0 said...

卡通成人影片 免費視訊金瓶梅 中年聊天室 aio交友愛情館影片免費85 歐美交友 自拍女優 性感成人內衣表演秀 女同影片 援交偷拍實錄 激情免費視訊聊天室 女生愛愛影片 情趣按摩貼圖 18性愛 夢幻少女寫真館 線上成人影城 免費a片貼 杜雷斯 色情影片 一夜情 383成人網 完美女人視訊 玩美女人視訊 線上美女 辣妹裸體 人妻的秘密 人妻熟女館 情色視訊 空姐 a圖a片交流區 美女寫真貼圖區 85cc線上 微風視訊成人 嘟嘟聊天室 sp7777.com 絲襪貼圖 熟女援交留言板 成人情色網 Live173 免費ava片線上看 洪爺影城色情網線上看 大奶美女做愛影片 做愛sex 免費下載av片 成人巨乳圖片 成人 後宮電影a下載 限制級成人網 channel0204 高中性愛影片 模特兒走光露點寫真

清民 said...

人逢順境不逞強,身處逆境不示弱。........................................

07_TeddyF_Silvey0 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
AlysiaDraeger0417永瑞 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
王周宏儒 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
溫淑芬 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
夏瓊富 said...

這麼好的部落格,以後看不到怎麼辦啊!!......................................................................

王婷珊 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
江婷 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
怡潔怡潔 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
郁雯郁雯 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
雲亨雲亨雲亨 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
原秋原秋 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Matt K said...

I recently finished Robert Brandom's Reason in Philosophy, and in it he offers a powerful alternative to thinking that the mistake Descartes made was to make thinking cognitive.

The short of it is that Descartes and Locke's mistake was to continue the Aristotelian tradition of what Brandom calls the "classificatory theory of consciousness." What we might say you were reacting to above is cognitivism's bad theory of consciousness. What we need is a different one, one that explains just what it is to be cognitive. Brandom takes it to be the use of inferences. He follows Wilfrid Sellars in thinking that rationality is the "game of giving and asking for reasons."

And this is the bit that strikes me as a move forward: Brandom assigns to Kant and Hegel the fundamental insights about the essentially moral and normative dimensions of reasoning. Brandom takes them as showing how to be rational is to be responsible to the others in your community.

Responsive differentiation is basic, but the specific kinds of differentiation that cognitive creatures are allowed is a function of our participation in a communal language. Brandom argues that responsibility itself is a function of cognition.

志張sf夏康如皓志gfg志 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.