----- Original Message ----- From: <kenneth.mackendrick at utoronto.ca> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 9:40 PM Subject: Re: Rob Schaap on Foucault
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 19:03:39 -0700 Ian Murray <seamus2001 at home.com>
wrote:
>
> > I call upon all anti-relativists to produce the absolute.....
>
> Under the conditions of postmetaphysical thought, one is not
obligated to
> produce *the* absolute to defend universals... but that's kind of a
technical
> point...
>
> As for an absolute, let me put it in the form of a question: Has
anyone here
> not had the experience of being younger than they are now?
>
> ken
========
So *the* absolute is the same or different from universals? Or does
the *the* give it away? I can imagine a theist saying "we don't need
to prove God exists to impose our universals on you." And are
universals the same as those propositions we would like to render
universalizable, or are we on the slippery slope to platonism?
Local time asymmetries for biological beings do not generalize to the STR or the GTR.
Ian