Hi List,
I would like to offer a quick reply to Gary, because he raises and important point about "factoring out language games". The meaning of this was not fully articulated in my opening. I was meaning in a "weak sense"; that is, by using the Justification Hypothesis to see how processes of justification emerge and picture provided by the ToK, then one can account for the (many) of the biases and blind spots that drive language games. I agree that a strong meaning would (such that there would be no language games, would be confusing and not workable). As I have been clear in my writing (e.g., Henriques, 2011), I see my system as a "justification system," as are all human linguistic propositional systems.
I would also say that I would place the ToK/UTUA framework at large in the language game of philosophy, as opposed to science, per se. I just started to listen to the book, The Story of Philosophy (https://www.amazon.com/Story-Philosophy-Opinions-Greatest-Philosophers/dp/0671739166). It opens with a call for philosophical thinking that is very much in the spirit of this list.
Best,
Gregg
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
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