gedavis.com home page button
gedavis.com blog button
    good thinking main page

gary e. davis
April 8, 2017
   

As the “sense of site” page notes generally, my sense of this Area is expressed as the constellation of topics to develop.

This Area is intended to be derivative of conceptual inquiry. The topics probably seem very incongruous because this Area lists more unfamiliar rubrics than other Areas.

What’s the point of fabricating a notion of “protean” identity? What is humanistic exemplarity in light of conceptual inquiry that serves (enables, supports,...) greater good in cultivating better humanity?

I have no trouble regarding myself in third person stance. Perhaps his Area could have been better named in a more practical way: philosophy of higher education?

   
  Topics that have a page show a link and date:
    value theory
protean identity
theory of discourse
teaching
cultivating humanity
rationality
intellectuality
philosophy of education
primordiality of healthy thinking
progressive pragmatism
public policy
healthy regioning
human rights
justice
American humanity
Habermasian studies | June 2017

 

2015 and earlier:
  2015 notes of language
      Tropicality may be necessary in discourse because the hermeneutical condition of being pragmatic is a function of evident developmentality (or general sense of audience). Ultimately, we’re beings who need literary sensibility together and poetic self understanding.
   
  2013 on being light
      Truly teaching is virtuous—teaching: beyond lecturing (or giving cogent, methodic presentations), not to mention “instruction” (and godforbid “training” in philosophy of education). Teach.
   
  2007 for the children
      Working for the good of one’s heirs, our heirs, has more integrity than the work of ants and bees. Yet, we too often live as if we’re not Earthlings (beings of difficult evolution and challenging individuation) on the way to greater future happiness than that of life now which ancestors made feasible for those of us who care to make good. There are indeed leading minds.
   
  2007 a legacy of humanism
      How quickly does a decade pass. Now, I’m deeply involved in a conception of interdomainal humanism as the foundations of higher education that looks back fondly on a legacy of individuation—historicity within discerned historicality—as if toward “him.” Indeed, I feel most of “...and earlier” things in third person voice.
   
  2009 love of enhancing humanity
      fitting fitness—fittingness... Let’s talk evolutionarity of being human, and wonder: Who are the leading minds? What is leading intelligence? Make a tribe named LIntelia. Find them in heights, loving to cultivate humanity. Make ‘LIntelic’ an adjective. (Actually, this discussion doesn’t coin the term.)
   
  2013 cultivating humanity
      Just do it.
   
  2003 / 2014 insight and the better argument
      One does as one can.
   
  2013 the better way
      This is a short anticipation of rigorously analytical work I’d like to do in value theory, beginning with Mark Schroeder’s ever-under-revision discussion.
   
  2003 / 2014 “pragmatic” truth
      So, you open the door into the room, that there they are: still arguing about truth—”which is more integrally bound up in value, Jürgen, than you discern,” said Hilary. Of course, this discussion is a continuation of something very ongoing. But sticking a link to part 4 here emphasizes a miasma of engagement with relations of value and truth that puts me in the room with Hilary Putnam and Jürgen Habermas abundantly (whatever the fruitfulness of that, hey! No “Meh” for me.)
   
  2008 appeal of discursive deliberation
      LIntelic leadership is good. This discussion of Cass R. Sunstein’s sympathy for Habermasian discourse is worthwhile by itself, but it’s especially pertinent for giving practical context to thinking about pragmatics of justification.
   
  2003 / 2014 a note on pragmatics of justification
      Warranting is vital to interest in truth, of course (and questions of validity generally—holding good enough, which is what “validity” really is). This discussion brings inquiry into Habermas’s sense of truth into interest in warranting as such.
   
  2005 / 2014 pragmatics of justification
      Teaching understanding is more important than defending a view. If your view is worthy of endorsement, it’s because you made yourself understood well enough. But the developmental relativity of interaction is axial. This is why Habermas’s “ideal speaking situation” (ISS model) is more important than he ever explicated. (More in this spirit at “reason for democracy” below.) The ISS model can be developed and employed to provide evidentiary assessment of appropriateness in argumentation relative to interests of teaching (or therapy).
   
  2003 / 2014 a brief sense of an American pragmatism
      I linked to the sections of this old discussion earlier (“being well”) and finish that linking later (“advancing community”). I will eventually ground this in a conception of Appropriative thinking which is at once pragmatic (re: teaching), hermeneutical (re: scholarship), and prospective (re: research). By the way, this 3-fold reminds me of the dialogue roles in Heidegger’s “Country Path Conversation”: guide, scholar, and scientist. (But that’s not a theme of “...Sense....”)
   
  2007 a sense of humanitarian care
      In the debate between neo-Aristotelian and neo-Kantian proxies, the between dissolves into a concerted cultivation of humanity. But this little discussion is little; and a decade old.
   
  2008 reason for democracy
      That humanism intrinsically values democratic thinking reflects our nature and ranges over our grand capability for systemicity.
   
  2014 notes at the beginning of reading Habermas’s “Norms and Values” essay
      This seven chapter working is, to me, doing philosophy—though I would use this “workbook” for more accessible presentation. I’m sharing a workbook, here and in the several other linked parts below and elsewhere (all listed at the bottom of the page here).
   
  2003 / 2014 Truth of Habermas’s “creative renewal”
      Interest in truth is ultimately about advancing inquiry and fruitfulness, rather than warranting commitments. Truth is essentially futural, as is being—reflecting constructive engagement—rather than basically stantial (defending status quo).
   
  2014 on dealing with issues of practical philosophy
      re: virtue of ethical pragmatics.
   
  2014 values, pluralism, and assessment
      “virtue...” continued.
   
  2014 virtue pragmatism and Dewey
      “virtue...” continued.
   
  2014 appealing to a common ethos
      “virtue...” brought to closure
   
  2015 fundamentalism and philosophy (as therapeutic)
      No great religion really implies or condones violence. They exist to build for peace (and promote fruitful lives, among other purposes). Actually, religious intuitions have evolutionary basis in Our humanity. But that’s not my practical concern here. By the way, when Heidegger wrote “Letter on ‘Humanism’,” there were quote marks in his title. Humanism may be the greatest idea We’re designing.
   
  2003 / 2014 from creative reason to health of nations
      This free ranging discussion is possessed, 2003, by desire to improve Habermas’s sense of action in order to better understand how creative reason may relate to social innovation better than his “research program” (he called his work, early on) affords. Amendations in 2014 merely serve to show how improvisational the discussion was, when added to the project on “Habermas and truth.”
   
  2008 minding the future good of humanity
      So, he would aspire—a decade ago now—to see “us” (my fantasy LIntelia) advance interdisciplinary research, seeing humanity evolve not by default, emergence, or advent, but by design (ideally democratic design, only feasible by enabling democratic potential).
   
  2014 philosophy after Habermas
      Whereto “philosophy” in the early 21st century? It’s an ultimately, inevitably open question, not to be answered but to be an appeal.
   
   

 

 

 
    Be fair. © 2017, g. e. davis.