tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7621529782651296685.post341916188823677001..comments2020-08-01T22:28:50.016-06:00Comments on Proactive Progressive Populism: Radical hermeneuticsEdward Bergehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13864657929019204993noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7621529782651296685.post-38493180832783400882011-05-02T07:50:17.320-06:002011-05-02T07:50:17.320-06:00While Gould acknowledges that they have different ...While Gould acknowledges that they have different validity criteria and methods of apprehension he nonetheless also knows that<br /><br />"This resolution might remain all neat and clean if the nonoverlapping magisteria (NOMA) of science and religion were separated by an extensive no man's land. But, in fact, the two magisteria bump right up against each other, interdigitating in wondrously complex ways along their joint border. Many of our deepest questions call upon aspects of both for different parts of a full answer—and the sorting of legitimate domains can become quite complex and difficult."<br /><br />Not only do these two domains bump up against each other, there are certain ideas or memes that permeate through all of the different methodological boundaries, certain big stories that make coherent sense of them all. For example the article by Sellars* kela referenced in the Big Stories thread notes that while there certainly is NOMA for specific diciplines nevertheless philosophy's job is to “understand how things in the broadest possible sense of the term hang together in the broadest possible sense of the term.” That it, how we might create broad, orienting generalizations and/or narratives about how the big picture coheres.<br /><br />For example, one such generalizing meme that cut across all disciplines was what is often referred to as postmodernism. The idea that there is no fixed center, no absolute, pre-given reality, runs through science to literature to religion, i.e. postmetaphysics. Postmetaphysics is not limited to any specific genre but is one of those overall cohering big pictures necessary to generate meaning. Contrary to popular kennlingist belief, pomo is not about total fragmentation and blind relativism, for it too has its own big picture story about how big pictures operate, albeit one that is non-metaphysical. So while there is no doubt some pomo relativists caught in a performative contradiction that there is no big story while advancing one, the better pomosexuals like Derrida and Caputo espouse no such nonsense.<br /><br />*http://www.ditext.com/sellars/psim.htmlEdward Bergehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13864657929019204993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7621529782651296685.post-51183208348274641652011-05-01T23:02:59.744-06:002011-05-01T23:02:59.744-06:00Indeed, Edward, indeed.Indeed, Edward, indeed.Steven Nickesonhttp://derechosalvaje.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7621529782651296685.post-8722753534146026182011-05-01T19:26:41.767-06:002011-05-01T19:26:41.767-06:00Also see Stephen Jay Gould's essay on nonoverl...Also see Stephen Jay Gould's essay on nonoverlapping magisteria.* He, like Caputo, sees that they have different validity criteria. Caputo affirms religion is apprehended through myth-poetic means while Gould agrees it requires metaphor and allegory.<br /><br />* http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_noma.htmlEdward Bergehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13864657929019204993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7621529782651296685.post-69362978877698501762011-05-01T18:56:53.939-06:002011-05-01T18:56:53.939-06:00Edward,
Two items:
1) I want to congratulate you ...Edward,<br />Two items:<br /><br />1) I want to congratulate you on changing the name to "Enactivism." It is a good step outside of the standard ossified dialogue of the Integral Province and something I am working on for a new post to my own blog.<br /><br />2) I am gratified by Caputo's placement of Science and Religion (a.k.a. Spirituality) on two different planes. But I suspect few will comprehend because both seem to provide sustenance for the mind in equal proportions...the cognitive dissonance between the two authorities is difficult to handle for those sensitive to their duties before their own individual authorities. <br /><br />So I would like to put forth an analogue: I was recently asked: What do you prefer, Food or Sex? Most people put both those into the venue of Sensuality and then try to escape. But within that venue it is obvious that the two exist on different planes. One does not tuck into a gourmet meal while making love, or vice-versa. But why should anyone be called on to make a preferential hierarchy between Science and Spirituality any more than between Sex and Food. It is stupid and exceptionally messy to Integrate the latter two. It is supremely anticlimactic to mediate between the two of them as luminaries and guides and coaches are all racing into the culturo/spiritual breaches so as to save us all. So without exception: you do one and then the other and then the other and then the other...Steven Nickesonhttp://derechosalvaje.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7621529782651296685.post-47939906995088731822011-05-01T11:10:06.799-06:002011-05-01T11:10:06.799-06:00More sermon, from Chapter 8, "Toward a postme...More sermon, from Chapter 8, "Toward a postmetaphysical rationality" p. 211:<br /><br />"Heidegger said that the play is at once the "deepest" for structures are but inscribed upon the flux and the "highest"for joining in the play is a free, productive release, the highest and best wisdom, the last and best stand one can make (SG 188). The one god that Nietzsche could tolerate was one that laughed and danced, and some of Heidegger's best pages have to do with the play of the fourfold and with finding a God before whom one can sing and dance. The difficulty, however, is that the world places little confidence in the play of things and a great deal of reliance on constraints, authority, and institutional structures, and that is why we are overrun with creeds and criteria, rules of life and rules of method. The fact is that the advocates of free play meet resistance at every step. They are suspected of anarchism, nihilism, of intellectual, social, and moral irresponsibility. Those who would dance and play before their God have constantly to dodge the theological bullets aimed their way by the defenders of the true faith. The free play of the faculties is checked by the demand for aesthetic standards. No matter how much or how well we are counseled to enjoy the play, there are always those who are threatened by such emancipation and who insist on knowing what the "criteria" are for determining exactly what that is."Edward Bergehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13864657929019204993noreply@blogger.com