> What Shane doesn't rea;ize is that what he thinks is keen reason is
> actually epistomological solipsism, i.e., something only exists and concerns
> me if I can understand it. It equates the way the world is experienced by a
> certain kind of hominid with the world, which is quite funny.
>
>
> --- On Fri, 11/21/08, Philp Pilkington <pilkingtonphil at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Not at all. If you conceive of human understanding as
> > absolutely open-ended
> > and thus accept your relative ignorance (i.e. not possesing
> > absolute
> > knowledge) of many things not only will you be able to
> > avoid dogmatic
> > statements and prescriptions but you'll also recognise
> > that there will
> > always be something new to seek out and understand. Its not
> > so much relating
> > the "unknowable" as much as it is allowing it a
> > place in the structure of
> > human understanding. That's what I'd see as a
> > humanist approach to "what is
> > outside of experience and outside of possible
> > conceptualization".
> > ___________________________________
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
Give me a "D", give me an "O", give me a "G".....