constructions of the world. "
By metaphysical I take it you mean mythical, as in the founding documents of a tribe or an era. In that sense Arthur Schlesinger can co-exist with Howard Zinn, as a hopeful or teleological account of history co-exists with a more cold-eyed empirical one. Evolutionary theory itself became mythical in the hands of the "survival of the fittest" social philosophers; and today's faith in technology to solve our problems is looking more and mythical, too.
BobW
--- "Charles A. Grimes" <cgrimes at rawbw.com> wrote:
>
> I think what Paz was referring to was a metaphysical
> conception of
> time, not the obvious empirical idea of history. The
> Christian cosmos
> so to speak as opposed to the Greek or Roman cosmos.
>
>
> This leads to something I've never understood, and
> that is the problem of
> reconciling say evolutionary history with a
> Christian cosmos. These
> are not necessarily in conflict, unless you make the
> conflict a point
> of `truth' in some cosmic sense of the word. There
> doesn't necessarily
> have to be a one to one exact match between everyday
> events, say
> as in evolutionary sciences, and the larger
> metaphysical constructions of
> the world.
>
> Anyway... lunch hour is short
>
> CG
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>