[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[xmca] As-is and As-if

I think you have it as I intended Larry, in your own words.
Indeed, there is tension between the two types of activity with their appropriate ontological stances, and both merge in their own way into everday life (fact vs. belief?). We see examples of inappropriate forms of such tension in the public discourse about anthropogenic climate change and in creationism as an alternative to evolution. On the other side, all manner of narrowmindedness and prejudice. *How certain* a factual claim may be, is a different question. Also troublesome are non-scientific as-is claims which play a regulatory social role: my as-is may be your as-if. There are tricky questions here!


Larry Purss wrote:
your post mentions that science is a particular type of rule based practise that focues on the as-is realm and hermeneutics is explicating the as-if realm. If this position is accepted it still leaves the question of the tension BETWEEN these realms. (I hope I'm reading your position as intended?)
Hermeneutic interpretation (as-if) and science (as-is as Andy explains science) are related. As Andy recommends we have various notions of how they are related.
Ingrid Josephs has a book she published in 2003 "Dialogicality and Development" which I have not read, but her engaging with the imaginary/reality tension and with the philosophy of as-IF is a book I will read soon.

xmca mailing list