>> On Sep 17, 2011, at 10:21 AM, Carrol Cox wrote:
>>
>>> Of course anyone can 'make' a v alue judgment'; there is sijply no reason for anyone else to accept it.
>>
>>> There is no way toadjudicate, for example, the different 'judgments' of Michael S& Joanna on Vivaldi.
>
> But is every proposition pointless that can't be 'adjudicated'?
> Saints preserve us, does the unlovely ghost of Karl Popper
> stalk the list?
Well, "Judgments" are a rather special kind of proposition. Descriptions of what one 'sees' in a building or a poem lead to conversation; a flat statement that a certain building is crap seems something of a conversation stopper. And my objection to a conversation made up of exchange of value judgments is not that it is pointless but that it is dull as hell. Debates as to how best to describe a certain item are also often not subject to any process of adjudication, but they are certainly NOT pointless: in fact they often produce new knowledge for all concerned, even if no one 'wins' the argument.
And what does one do with a "Value Judgment" anyhow? Wear it like a bumper sticker?
There are countless forms of conversation about books, buildings, paintings, etc that are enndlessly fascinating and sometimes produce real knowledge, or at least help participants clarify their own thinking. Value judgments take us out of the realm of exchanging points of view or undrstanding and set up mock stock exchanges or mock courtrooms. Dull. Dull. Dull.
Carrol