Many Thanks and Some Questions ...

Dear WSN and Company,

First of all, I want to thank John Landon for his ongoing contributions to the List thus far and to David Christian for his input also; this is all very interesting, and I believe quite, quite useful material.  It certainly helps further illuminate much of the matter already discussed by Ranci, Prugovecki, et al on this topic, as well as to show the significant import to the study of social science.

This question is for John Landon especially [and/or anyone else who cares to respond] -> How would the “Big History” ideal of convergent conceptual maps for history, science, philosophy, et al (and framing such maps in terms of the others) square with the evolutionary model of the Eonic Effect and its related research? …

**********

In response to Mike Alexander’s reply on my most recent post – This matter we’re discussing also brings up another obvious set of questions:  since so much of science is based on the utilitarian model of thought and upon pragmatism, what are the most glaring shortfalls of philosophical Pragmatism and Utilitarianism (i.e., in terms of the Utilitarian Calculus)?  Do they have any shortfalls?  If the ideas of rhetorical persuasion and concrete, practical demonstration are so important to empirical inquiry and to science in general, at what point do we as scientists and social scientists draw the line between true science and philosophy and the Sophism of Socrates contemporaries in Classical Greece?  In other words, is there a point at which ‘persuasion isn’t everything’ – (what’s entailed in such a point)?  Is there a point at which the conventions of a majority group of intellectuals in a given generation can erroneous – even when they seem to have the facts and the power of demonstration/persuasion on their side?  If so how can a good legitimate scientist/philosopher/ or otherwise scholar possibly tell which is the more accurate point of view, since so much of what we call good science is entailed in persuasive rhetoric and the funded knowledge of a majority opinion of scholars?  How might we work ourselves through the intellectual puzzle I’ve posed to adequately answer this question?

Best!

Luke R.

---

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better