Re: BHA: Mainstream Philosophy of Science

[Mervyn Hartwig <mh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Phil, Tobin,

I took Tobin's comment to mean that Bhaskar's message, hence his
audience, has been perceived to be Left. True.

Why were you surprised, Phil, to find Bhaskar at a conference on
scientific realism and theology, but not surprised to find yourself
there? Doubtless Roy's attendance had to do with the fact that a leading
Oxford theologian, Alister McGrath, has taken up critical realism in a
big way. More details in the November JCR.

Mervyn


Phil Walden <phil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
>Hi Tobin,
>
>Pressed for time but there is a short response below:
>>
>>
>> A couple of other thoughts on the way CR and similar developments in
>> mainstream philosophy seem not to know much about each other.  I would
>> hazard a guess that Bhaskar has been mainly interested in addressing the
>> political left than mainstream philosophers.
>
>I would not say that I know Roy Bhaskar well.  However, I do know him well
>enough to know that he has spent very little time addressing the political
>left.  Instead I think Roy Bhaskar has spent a lot of time in philosophical
>gatherings wrestling with recalcitrant problems bequeathed us by the history
>of philosophy.  I live in Oxford and I remember a few years ago going to a
>small conference about "Scientific Realism and God" or some very similar
>title.  To my surprise who should be there but Roy, and as ever he was
>getting in with a contribution on all the debates.  In fact, as I remember
>it, the Oxford-based philosophers virtually had to suppress Roy because he
>had so much to say.  If I can dig up my notes from that conference I might
>try to post something on the list about it.  (Not promising).
>
>Best regards,
>
>Phil
>
>  (I don't know him
>> personally -- those of you who do may want to speak to that.)  To
>> the extent
>> that he *does* engage contemporary philosophers, which isn't much in any
>> case, they're mostly people like Derrida who have been championed by
>> progressives.  Conversely, few mainstream philosophers are willing to have
>> much truck with leftists (or maybe I should say, few *male* philosophers;
>> anyway, a fair number of prominent female philosophers are
>> somewhere on the
>> left).
>>
>> But the problem occurs in other corners too.  For example, Lakoff &
>> Johnson's work comes awfully close to CR in many respects.  But
>> not only are
>> they apparently unaware of CR, they also don't cite many of the mainstream
>> philosophers toiling in these fields.  And Johnson is himself a philosophy
>> prof!  Similarly, one might have expected the (left-leaning)
>> contributors to
>> a recent collection on identity and realism to be acquainted with CR, but
>> with one partial exception, none of them are.  Etc.
>>
>> Mostly, everyone seems to be in their own little cul-de-sac.  One might
>> describe this as specialization and an increasing division of intellectual
>> labor.  But whatever it is, clearly a lot of networking needs to be done.
>>
>> ---
>> Tobin Nellhaus
>> nellhaus@xxxxxxxx
>> "Faith requires us to be materialists without flinching": C.S. Peirce
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>      --- from list bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>>
>>
>
>
>
>     --- from list bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

--
Mervyn Hartwig
Editor, Journal of Critical Realism (incorporating 'Alethia')
13 Spenser Road
Herne Hill
London SE24 ONS
United Kingdom
Tel: 020 7 737 2892
Email: <mh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Subscription forms:
http://www.criticalrealism.demon.co.uk/iacr/membership.html

There is another world, but it is in this one.
Paul Eluard



     --- from list bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---