Physicists are, at bottom, a naïve breed, forever trying to come to terms with the world out there by methods which involve in essence the same element of direct contact as a well-placed kick.
The philosophically interesting position is not instrumentalism, which is indeed barren, buy operationalism, being closer to the nature of activity. As Bridgman brilliantly put it “In a physical world, ds is not given”.
What a brilliant note this is, extremely insightful and clear as always. Now, not sure what E.S. had in mind but we do not construct an objective word “from” experience, the world IS entirely subjective (or put it another way, there is nothing in the historical world that is purely objective). That project of objectivation failed, indeed it barely took off since Aristotle, and if Kant did anything to “solve it” it was jut by increasing the breach. The world IS in the opposite direction, that of the predicate. I sometimes wonder what part of “beware, this-is-an-abstraction” people don’t understand?
PS. Double kudos for me for commenting without mentioning him, and not even him.
The philosophically interesting position is not instrumentalism, which is indeed barren, buy operationalism, being closer to the nature of activity. As Bridgman brilliantly put it “In a physical world, ds is not given”.
What a brilliant note this is, extremely insightful and clear as always. Now, not sure what E.S. had in mind but we do not construct an objective word “from” experience, the world IS entirely subjective (or put it another way, there is nothing in the historical world that is purely objective). That project of objectivation failed, indeed it barely took off since Aristotle, and if Kant did anything to “solve it” it was jut by increasing the breach. The world IS in the opposite direction, that of the predicate. I sometimes wonder what part of “beware, this-is-an-abstraction” people don’t understand?
PS. Double kudos for me for commenting without mentioning him, and not even him.