TOK-SOCIETY-L Archives

December 2017

TOK-SOCIETY-L@LISTSERV.JMU.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Gary Brill <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 21 Dec 2017 16:48:46 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines)
Greetings ToK-Society List,

This is Gary Brill, recently retired from the Rutgers psychology faculty. I've been interested in the Tree of Knowledge System for several years and have been following its development into the UTUA framework and Metaphysical Empiricism.

As Gregg knows, I have strong enthusiasm for the potential of these ideas, but I also have a number of questions and objections. For now, I will limit my comments to an important theme in Gregg's opening introduction to the list (one that Chance McDermott also touched upon in an earlier posting): the notion of "factoring out human language games." 

Gregg states that factoring out language games will leave behind the "picture of the universe offered by the Tree of Knowledge System." But if science (along with religion, law, societal customs, etc.) is a justification systems and if justification systems are language games (as stated in the opening introduction), then "factoring out language games" factors out science itself. Nothing is left behind.

It seems to me that the ToK/UTUA must be conceptualized as situatied *within* the language game of science. And if that is the case, then there still remains the need to address various tough criticisms of the scientific approach to psychology, criticisms that have been leveled both by philosophers (e.g., Charles Taylor) and theoretical psychologists (e.g., Brent Slife, Frank Richardson, and many others).

Briefly, the main challenge is that science, the quest to uncover objective, timeless and universal principles (laws), is not appropriate for understanding historically- and culturally-situated beings whose behavior and mental life (including language games) are consituted by their constantly changing, meaningful interpretations of their culture, relationships, and experiences. 

I consider the ToK/UTUA a very good attempt at framing things within the science language game, but I don't see how it can be justified on the basis of it being what is left when language games are factored out.

Thanks to Gregg for establishing this group and happy holidays to all,
Gary

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1

ATOM RSS1 RSS2