"New Pluralism" according to Watson the most important philosophical discovery of the present century. To say that Watson's declaration did not go down well with the establishment members of the NEH panel which rejected unanimously a proposal for support for the first national conference on systematic pluralism (held in April 1990) would be an understatement: as one member of the panel of distinguished philosophers categorically responded, "The claim of Watson, quoted [in the] proposal, is... completely groundless." (..) Henry Alonzo Myers, in a sadly neglected 1935 article which may contain the earliest use of the term 'systematic pluralism'. (..) Systematic pluralism asserts that each system stands in a relation of "reciprocal priority" to other systems and their basic elements. (..) My thesis is that McKeon and Pepper are the two great philosophical pluralists and that their systems are similar enough to be appealing and different enough to complement/correct each other. (..) Kant: space, time, causality not intrinsic structures of things in themselves, but provided by the mind. (..) Pepper and McKeon join in rejecting dogmatisim, radical relativism, and skepticism. At the same time, both are bold enough to claim a considerable measure of truth for their respective pluralistic systems. (..) It seems to me that McKeon's orientation is logical and rhetorical, while Pepper's is psychological and historical. (..) That is, Pepper begins with simples which do not have a character and can therefore be analogized to construct propositions and systems [somewhat Platonic], while McKeon always begins with terms that have been given univocal meanings by being placed in specified contexts; and meanings change when contexts change [more Aristotelian]. (..) Pepper is a pluralistic lumper, while McKeon is a pluralistic splitter. (..) Pepper's pluralism presents four relatively adequate philosophies, developed from a 'root metaphor' (e.g. machine - mechanism). (..) In the typically dialectical movement of an analogical approach, Pepper's formism and mechanism are pulling toward each other, as are contextualism and organicism. And the greater pair of opposed positions, labelled "analytical theories" and "synthetic theories," are striving for unification in the middle space between mechanism and contextualism (the space Pepper was to fill with his selectivism hypothesis). (..) Both the origin and the significance of McKeon's schema is very different from Pepper's (as well as more complicated), though essentially compatible with it. (..) McKeon developed a philosophic semantics to examine the "different solutions of philosophic problems" (..) giving us the "four inclusive main heads of philosophic semantics[:] Principles, Methods, Interpretations, and Selections .... "(Philosophical Semantics, 244) His claim that the 4 variables "are formally exhaustive of possibilities" aks for examination [and possible refutation?]. (..) McKeon maintains that there are, for instance, no operational or mechanistic philosophies, only philosophies which employ operational or logistic methods, along with whatever principles and interpretations. (..) Although 'pure modes' (Watson's term) can be distinguished in the 'classis' (late Hellenic) philosophy, systems with mixed modes are not inherently inferior: McKeon would never say, as Pepper does, that "eclecticism is confusing," because eclecticism in Pepper's sense has no meaning for McKeon. (..) McKeon values the vitality and novelty that can result from new combinations of variables. (..) A closer look at the way both men treat Aristotle is a good way to reveal some of the relative strengths and weaknesses of the two systems. (..) An analogical thinker, Pepper wants to emphasize similarities rather than differences. His lumping together of Plato and Aristotle as formists illustrates this inclination. (..) But form-differences: transcendent (Plato) - immanent (Aristotle); reconciliation of parts (Pato) - subordination of parts (Aristotle), ... (..) Pepper's is an analogical [organistic] pluralism - McKeon's discrete pluralism. (..) Pepper: tendency of bending evidence in the texts into the preconceived pattern of one of the world hypotheses. McKeon: more precise analytical tools. |