Re: [Critical-Realism] transitive/intransitive, cr and philosophy, etc.

[<gdemetrion@xxxxxxx>]

 I wonder if too much weight is being placed here (by which I mean in this  
whole thread, not in Dave T's post specifically) on the  
transitive/intransitive distinction.  Is it perhaps a pragmatic,  
context-sensitive distinction that is useful in organising our thinking  
about the scientific process rather than a fundamental ontological  
distinction?

Dave E-V

Dave , others,

If that's the case, and I don't know enough to say it is, would not that put the transitive/intransitive distinction into the category of an intriguingly useful heuristic at least at the level of epistemology whatever the reality may be even as the gap between the two might be unfathomable however closed the circuit may become in any given investigation

Even if that were the case I'm not sure that would not take away anything in terms of what Ruth refers to as the intriguing prospect of scientific essentialism upon which it might be instructive to hear more. Perhaps more work may be needed or at least spelled out here on how one can probe into ontology from the perspective of the finite knower.   

On reading RTS and engaging in broader discussion: Given the dynamic of listserv communication perhaps we can proceed with both the best we can, realizing the systematicity one might find in a lecture series, professional article or book is extremely difficult to parallel in this much hotter medium.  Configuring threads from the archives and turning them into readable documents is one way to go.

George Demetrion
_______________________________________________
Critical-Realism mailing list
Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism