>>> jkschw at hotmail.com 07/25/01 03:35PM >>>
Well, neither of you are persuaded, so this cuts my way, not yours. I myself can recall vividly the two or three times in my life when my mind was actually changed about something important by an argument.
(((((
CB: Perhaps it is that to change one's position immediately in response to someone's argument against one is rare, but is less rare in a delayed reaction ,over more time, not having to eat crow in front of the person one has been arguing with, and ,as you point to, in conjunction with new experience which is seen in a different light because of the heated argument of the past
clip
The other time that sticks in my haed was when a prof at Michigan blew apart the nomological theory of exaplanation for me by illustrating singular explanation. She knocked over a cup and said, it fell over because I hit it. Oh, right! That clearedthe Hempelian cobwebs from head pretty fast.
(((((((
CB: What's nomological theory of explanation ? Must show a general pattern ? Hempel's "streaking nakedmindedly" award for revealing all one is thinking openly to others ? ((((((((
. I think this is how most people learn things, from life, not from arguments. Is that a bad thing? I don't think so,
(((((((
CB: I don't mean to be disrespectful , but I couldn't help but think "experience is the best teacher" , "school of hardknocks" and " the proof of the pudding is in the eating " -
But overall , I have an intuition , a posteriori, in agreement with Justin's conclusions here. And anyway, he has checked out philosophy thoroughly for me. And anyway , I don't have much worry that Justin would give theory less attention than it deserves.
- Aesop :>)