Re: [Critical-Realism] Practical Application of Critical Realism

[Mark Johnson <mwj1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Did anyone see this?
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article5489134.ece

What about the environmental impact of our online discussion? If there is a
measurable environmental impact to every contribution, would we be more
careful in ensuring that our contributions were constructive? Face-to-face
University committees (which discuss these things) are very expensive
(academics don't come cheap!)... it tends to shape the conversation! Maybe
something to consider if you're really going to be 'practical'.

Mark

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Mervyn Hartwig <mh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> Hi Louis
>
> I can't accept that lying is in any sense commitment to truth - it's
> commitment to the pretense of truth, to a fraud, although of course you do
> have to be consistent about it. Nor can I see any slide - my argument
> assumes truth-seeking. On looking again at your 'devil's advocate Humean
> critique' I can't see the point of it - are you saying that Hume's law
> isn't
> after all espoused by Humeans, it doesn't exist, it's just a figment of our
> imaginations or what? In what sense has a Humean accommodated my position
> as
> distinct from abandoning his own if he concedes that you can after all
> derive values from facts?
>
> Mervyn
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Louis
> Irwin
> Sent: 20 January 2009 04:12
> To: 'Continuation of the Spoon Bhaskar List'
> Subject: Re: [Critical-Realism] Practical Application of Critical Realism
>
> Hi Mervyn,
>
> Good points, however note that there is an ambiguity over "commitment to
> truth". If I make any kind of assertion, then I am certainly "committed to
> its truth" - even if I am lying.  For example, if I say it is raining
> outside with the intention of deceiving you, my assertion nonetheless
> commits me to its truth, even though I know it is false. This is a sense of
> "commitment to truth" that John Searle explored many years ago in "Speech
> Acts", and relates to the Habermas view; it is "transcendentally necessary
> for any communication whatsoever" as you say. However there is a different
> sense of "commitment to truth" that someone can lack even when he/she has
> the first type of commitment. The second sort of "commitment to truth"
> involves a desire to communicate what happens to be true (and to refrain
> from communicating falsehoods); this is the commitment involved in what I
> called a "seeker of truth". A deceiver who has the first sort of
> "commitment
> to truth" lacks the second sort of commitment - the liar's communication
> transcendentally commits the liar to the truth of what he/she asserts, but
> the liar wants to communicate what he/she knows (or even just believes) to
> be false. [I believe that Searle responded along these lines to an essay by
> Habermas on Searle.] It seems to me that your position requires sliding
> mid-argument from the first type of "commitment to truth" to the second
> type. (My devil's advocate 'Humean critique' only involved the second type.
> And neither its premisses nor conclusion involve value assertions at all,
> although its conclusion can be parsed, as I noted, in terms of a Humean
> "ought".)
>
> Louis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mervyn
> Hartwig
> Sent: Monday, January 19, 2009 2:27 PM
> To: 'Continuation of the Spoon Bhaskar List'
> Subject: Re: [Critical-Realism] Practical Application of Critical Realism
>
> Hi Louis, Ruth
>
> My point, concretely illustrated, was that (1) fact: 'racism is false' and
> (2) fact: 'your beliefs are racist' DO logically entail (3) the valuation:
> 'you should change your racist beliefs', and that we (quite rightly) act as
> if this is the case all the time. Commitment to truth is intrinsic to what
> a
> fact is and transcendentally necessary for any communication whatsoever
> (Habermas' point) and so, as Bhaskar pointed out already in PON, 'cannot be
> seized upon as a concealed (value) premise to rescue the autonomy of values
> from factual discourse, without destroying the distinction between the two,
> the distinction that it is the point of the objection to uphold'. Ths is a
> point that is nearly always ignored by Bhaskar's critics on this issue.
> (The
> objection was that the premises include commitment to truth).
>
> Mervyn
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ruth
> Groff
> Sent: 19 January 2009 18:29
> To: Continuation of the Spoon Bhaskar List
> Subject: Re: [Critical-Realism] Practical Application of Critical Realism
>
> This is interesting.  I think the Humean would just say that there is
> nothing about the fact(s) of the matter regarding P (or ~P) that will
> LOGICALLY require you to adopt the normative belief "I ought to pursue the
> truth regarding P" -- or even "I ought to be a truth-seeker generally."
> IFyou already are one, then various things follow.
>
> To my mind, the strong arguments against Hume are comprehensive ones, about
> what kinds of reactions to things are psychically viable, ultimately.  A
> slightly narrower version would be Habermas' arguments about what is
> implied
> normatively by the fact of language.
>
> Sorry to just dip in, in this wildly unsatisfying way.
>
> r.
>
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Louis Irwin <louisirwin9@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Hi Mervyn,
> >
> > Your point about changing opinions in the face of criticism  is well
> > stated, but I wonder if Humeans could not accommodate the point within
> > their own framework.  Here is the way a 'Humean critique' of an
> > opinion could go:
> >
> > 1. Premiss: You have some specific opinion - say a belief that P.
> >
> > 2. Grounds that P is false are presented here.
> >
> > 3. Anyone persuaded by the grounds in 2 will believe that P is false,
> > or at least refuse to believe that P is true, because either the
> > grounds logically entail that P is false, or they at least make it
> > empirically or scientifically likely.
> >
> > 4. Premiss: Up to now you have been a seeker of truth.
> >
> > 5. If a seeker of truth is shown that there are grounds to believe
> > that something is false, he/she will refuse to believe it [by the
> > meaning of a "seeker of truth"].
> >
> > 6. You have been shown [in 2] that there are grounds to believe that P
> > is false.
> >
> > 7. Therefore if you are to remain a seeker of truth, then you must
> > change your opinion, either believing that P is false or at least
> > withholding your belief that it is true.
> >
> > Everything in this 'Humean critique' seems acceptable to a Humean,
> > including the conclusion. Note the conclusion can be read as "If you
> > want to remain a seeker of truth, then you ought to change your
> > opinion" - where the Humean "ought" is relative to an empirical desire
> > (namely to remain a seeker of truth).
> >
> >
> > Louis Irwin
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > Mervyn Hartwig
> > Sent: Monday, January 19, 2009 8:02 AM
> > To: 'Continuation of the Spoon Bhaskar List'
> > Subject: Re: [Critical-Realism] Practical Application of Critical
> > Realism
> >
> > I agree.
> >
> > Of course, a large contingent of basic or original critical realists
> > are staunch upholders of 'Hume's Law', denying that it is logically
> > possible to get from facts to values, but every time they so much as
> > criticise an opinion they contradict this in practice, their message
> > being that the person should change the opinion, CP (other things
> > being equal), because it is mistaken, misleading etc. That we always
> > have to make a judgement as to whether things are indeed equal, i.e.
> > worse consequences won't ensue, is no different from the application
> > of any piece of science in open systems, e.g.
> > building a bridge or whatever.
> >
> > Mervyn
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > J.A.Toynbee
> > Sent: 19 January 2009 12:03
> > To: Continuation of the Spoon Bhaskar List
> > Subject: Re: [Critical-Realism] Practical Application of Critical
> > Realism
> >
> > Hans,
> >
> > This is a brave and important move. The statement itself is clear and
> > well constructed. More importantly, it's the sort of call to action we
> > ought to be doing much more of in academia. Could we circulate it, or
> > a version of it, as model for others to use?
> >
> > Jason
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > ehrbar
> > Sent: 19 January 2009 11:15
> > To: critical-realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [Critical-Realism] Practical Application of Critical Realism
> >
> >
> > The environmental and sustainability instructors at the University of
> > Utah are involved in a heated discussion.  It began with my somewhat
> > rash proposal to stage a sit-in at the office of the University
> > President asking him to take a more active leadership regarding global
> > warming.  During this discussion it occurred to me that the critical
> > realist critique of the fact-value distinction applies.  Therefore I
> > attempted, in an email sent to them, to make a serious philosophical
> > derivation of our obligations as scientists.  Please look it over, I
> > value
> your trained philosophers' eyes:
> > does my argument hold water or am I overlooking something, and is this
> > identical to the critical realist critique? Here is what I sent:
> >
> >
> > I agree that education about global warming is our most important
> mission.
> > Assume we fulfill this mission in the classroom.  As everyone knows,
> > when the students come out of our classrooms, they see a world which
> > is acting as if global warming was only marginally relevant.  We
> > cannot leave this unaddressed, therefore our mission
> > expands: not only do we have to tell the students that global warming
> > is serious, but we also have to explain why society denies this .
> > Our committment to truth does not allow us to stop here. Our mission
> > expands a third time: we have to teach them not only why society
> > denies the truth but also how to *overcome* this obstacle.  Finally I
> > would argue that our mission expands a fourth time: not only do we
> > have to
> > *teach* them this but we, in our own practice, have to work to
> > overcome society's denial of global warming.  If we don't do this we
> > commit the error of theory-practice inconsistency, i.e., we allow our
> > actions to contradict what we say.  If we value truth, and as
> > scientists we do, this does, indeed, have practical implications for
> > us, not only in the laboratory but also in society at large.
> >
> > There is still an additional step in the argument.  Our ethical
> > obligation to act, which flows from our scientific committment to the
> > truth, is always a *conditional* obligation.  If circumstances are
> > such that direct action on this would be counterproductive, then of
> > course we do not have to act.  But I am willing to argue that it is
> > not only our obligation but also that the time is ripe to push the
> > envelope on this front.
> >
> >
> > So far the excerpt from an email I just sent to a group of professors.
> > If you have feedback I would appreciate hearing about it.
> >
> > Hans E.
> >
> > Hans G. Ehrbar
> http://www.econ.utah.edu/~ehrbar <http://www.econ.utah.edu/%7Eehrbar><
> http://www.econ.utah.edu/%7Eehrbar>
> > ehrbar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Economics Department, University of Utah     (801) 581 7797 (my office)
> > 1645 Campus Center Dr., Rm 308               (801) 581 7481 (econ
> > office)
> > Salt Lake City    UT 84112-9300              (801) 585 5649 (FAX)
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Critical-Realism mailing list
> > Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an
> > exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland
> > (SC 038302).
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Critical-Realism mailing list
> > Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism
> >
> > __________ NOD32 3774 (20090117) Information __________
> >
> > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Critical-Realism mailing list
> > Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Critical-Realism mailing list
> > Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Critical-Realism mailing list
> Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism
>
> __________ NOD32 3774 (20090117) Information __________
>
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Critical-Realism mailing list
> Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Critical-Realism mailing list
> Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism
>
> __________ NOD32 3778 (20090119) Information __________
>
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Critical-Realism mailing list
> Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism
>



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Johnson
Institute for Educational Cybernetics
University of Bolton
BL3 5AB
Tel. 01204 903567
Mob. 0778 6064505
_______________________________________________
Critical-Realism mailing list
Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism