> What anti-foundationalism claims is that there are no rational grounds for
> evaluating "thinking" and "feeling", no basis, for instance, for judging
> Glenn Beck's tears and anger as examples of "feeling wrongly".
>
> The tradition deriving from Aristotle disputes this, but it elaborates
> rational thinking and feeling as "virtue", as the expression of a "second
> nature". So an individiual trying to reach the right feeling by consulting
> a book hasn't understood Aristotle's ethics.
>
> Marx, sublating Aristotle, claimed that those who think and feel wrongly
> couldn't create "socialism". It couldn't, for example, be created by the
> individuals enjoying the activity captured in the postcards collected
> together here.
>
> <http://www.withoutsanctuary.org/>
>
> They're thinking and feeling wrongly.
>
> Ted
================
Ah yes. The appeal to one tradition and web of authority.
How Quaint.
Onward Megarians!
Ian
"Reason demands belief in infinitely many contradictions" [Roy Sorenson]