Lee said
>I entirely reject the domain of aesthetic/cultural value as supplying
>anything for the purpose of ferreting out objective truth and reality.
>
>Does this make me, no matter how much I might publically value the
>arts as both fulfilling and entertaining, and no matter how valuable
>to human beings I believe emotions to be (because it benefits them so
>and enriches their lives so), make me a proponent of scientism?
Lee, I'd like to know a little bit more about what you mean by the first
paragraph before I answer that question. :-)
For example, there are some complex questions about whether it is possible
to be objective in giving an interpretation of a work of art. I think there
might be a sense in which you can be, at least sometimes.
However, my answer to your question would almost certainly be "no". Your
second para seems to make pretty clear that you don't reject the
aesthetic/cultural domain. My point wasn't about whether this domain is, in
some sense, a source of facts about "objective truth and reality". It was
about whether this domain is *of value*. Moreover, I've tried to bracket
off, throughout this discussion, issues of whether values are ultimately
objective or subjective. I'm happy to discuss such issues, but they didn't
seem relevant to the point I was trying to make to Samantha. I was actually
trying to narrow the use of the term "scientism", not broaden it to include
people like you.
R
==========================================================
Russell Blackford
writer philosopher lawyer transhumanist
Active Member: Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America (SFWA)
Member: Science Fiction Research Association (SFRA)
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:48 MDT