Skip to main content

Seeking Pomona

Vomit the Lukewarm might be the best generally unrecognized philosophy blog that I am aware of (I don't see it linked to much). He's hit this nail right on the head:
We love what we love because it is good, seek to know what we do because its true, and admire what we do because it is admirable etc.. Whether what we love is in fact good is beside the point. We cannot seek something inasmuch as it is apparently good, nor intend towards knowledge except as truth. Abuses and mistakes of judgment do not change the nature of intention. If I get lost on the way to the store and end up in Pomona, I don't say that I really sought Pomona. In the same way, we can't say of someone who seeks what is in fact an apparent good that he really sought an apparent good. An apparent good is never sought as such, only a real one. The intention of the lost man was not to an apparent store.
This is spot on. This is why the virtue of Charity is so valuable. Charity, I think btw, is why I try keep to keep NWW from being too polemical. If I wanted to do polemics, believe me I could. It would bore me to death, however. I see it in other writings and I just turn the page. What I try to do is be a fair and just critic of things written and spoken, without tearing too much into the speakers I address. Politics is not about cheering for the home team. There is no Stanley Cup for it, and that's not just because the season was cancelled. Once you have the ring of power, then what? This anonymous blogger's post on the war on patriarchy is also very good.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reuters joins CNN on the bench

Makes room for CanWest to join the majors Kudos to CanWest for calling a terrorist a terrorist . Many, including The Last Amazon , will be happy to hear it. Reuters is among the worst of the major western news services, where I would also place the BBC and the CBC. Unsurprisingly, Reuters is not happy about the changes CanWest made to Reuters wire stories: Our editorial policy is that we don't use emotive words when labeling someone," said David A. Schlesinger, Reuters' global managing editor. "Any paper can change copy and do whatever they want. But if a paper wants to change our copy that way, we would be more comfortable if they remove the byline." Mr. Schlesinger said he was concerned that changes like those made at CanWest could lead to "confusion" about what Reuters is reporting and possibly endanger its reporters in volatile areas or situations. "My goal is to protect ...

Wordpress

My move to Mac has been very happy except for two issues - gaming and blogging. For websurfing and multimedia, a Mac is of course a terrific machine. Games on the Mac platform are often ports of games made for the larger PC market and that means a Mac gamer will have to wait for the port. I'm not a heavy gamer by any means but I am very happy that the Mac port of Civilization 4 is finally here. Well, my copy isn't here quite yet - but it has been ordered and ought to be here soon. The blogging issue is more complicated. I'm not fond of writing my posts in a browser window. This goes back to when I was first blogging and I lost one or two large posts into the ether. After that I moved to w.bloggar - a great little app that let me compose on my desktop and then click send when all was said and done. I have not been able to recreate that experience on my Mac, and not for a lack of trying! I looked at Marsedit , but that forces you to compse while staring at a bunch of HMT...

A very limited form of inquiry

Real Clear Politics is carrying commentary on James Q. Wilson's WSJ article on ID (got that?). Wilson, the respected social scientist, gets it mostly right when he says that ID is not science because it can't be tested: So ID is not science. Does this mean that science, in any way, implies the non-existence of God? No. Does this mean that belief in God is irrational and that we should all be "free thinkers"? No. Does this mean that it is impossible to arbitrate between various theories of the existence/non-existence of God and come to some reasonable conclusions? No. Does this mean that we cannot say that humanity is meant to exist? No. In other words, rationality outside of science is quite possible, and has been around for a long time. How do you think humanity invented science in the first place? We surely did not do it scientifically. Science as we know it is the product of millennia of philosophical debate -- from Aristotle to Lakatos. Science depends upon phi...