[FRIAM] Pragmaticism and puritanism

[thompnickson2 at gmail.com]

Dear Phellow Phriammers, 

 

I want to thank you all for giving me a place to think "out loud" about
these matters.  You see, as a behaviorist, out loud is the only way I know
how to think.  

 

I was struck by the relation between two words of critique employed in
Glen's and Dave's most recent posts:  Elitist!  And Puritan!  What is
remarkable to me is that they really do go together.  Elitist points to my
privileging science as a method for determining the truth.  Puritan points
to my reluctance to risk future satisfaction for present pleasure.  What
they share is an [Apollonian?} focus on the long run.  Really the two boil
down to the same thing . that the apparent non-randomness of past events is
evidence that in some sense, and to some degree, the future can be counted
on, that a careful plan will, on average and with many exceptions, lead to a
better result than a impulsive reaction.  "Science" is just a name for
practices of knowledge-gathering that have a likelihood to produce
expectations of experience that will endure.  So, my privileging of science,
in general, and expertise in particular is recursive: I believe in science
because in my enduring experience science produces expectations that endure
the test of time.  I.e, scientific behavior is somewhat more likely to work
out in the long run than non scientific behavior, despite MANY exceptions.
Puritan (sez I) is just a name for somebody whose confidence that there IS a
future is sufficient to justify relinquishing short term pleasure for the
enjoyment of the long run.   

 

No, I am not sure that Dave and Glen would disagree with any of this.  That
ambiguity is what makes this argument so tantalizing for me.  Dave MIGHT be
saying that the evidence suggests that to be consistent, I and all other
elitist puritans SHOULD be taking  psychedelics  because the evidence shows
that the knowledge gained thereby will pass the test of time and that the
long term satisfaction I will gain from having taken them will cancel out
any short term ill-ease that I experience.  In short, are you sharing my
elitist puritanism but challenging my understanding of its implications, or
are you disagreeing with my elitist puritanism, and offering a different,
non-pragmaticist, approach to life.  Or both?  Or neither?  

 

I am sure you both will say that you have explained this to me a dozen time,
and why on earth would you repeat yourselves now.  

 

Perhaps you have brought me to a teachable moment? 

 

By the way, Dave.  What probably would happen if you showed up at Friam
under the influence is that I would ask you to quarantine yourself for two
weeks.  Last night AP revealed that the Trump administration had vetoed a
CDC recommendation that all elderly persons be discouraged from getting on
airplanes for the foreseeable future.  Elderly, to my surprise, seems to
mean "over 60".  

 

 

 

 

 

Nick 

 

 

 

 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com <mailto:ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com> 

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200310/f1bfda66/attachment.html>