On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, andie nachgeborenen wrote:
> However, on Miles' view if the matter, it seems that my awareness that
> there must be mistakes in the paper means that Judge Posner's views
> (which are generally orthogonal to mine, except about pragmatism in
> geberal and the virtues of markets, which I don't take as far as he
> does) are just as true as mine even where we disagree. Or are "true for
> him" while mine are just "true for me." And I don't see that this
> follows at all.
Okay, I think I see where you're coming from. Just as you do, I wholly reject this kind of subjectivism. My point is this: Whether or not your views are considered "true" is dependent upon the social settings in which those views are expressed. There are social conditions under which your views would be considered insightful and brilliant; there are other social conditions under which your views would be considered misguided or blasphemous. (Given the choice, I'd rather live in the former rather than the latter, but I digress.)
I think Wittgenstein is useful here: our language games are part of our form of life, and they make sense (or don't) because they're inbricated in social practices.
Miles