Is "commensurability" the right word to use?

WordNet 2.0 defines "commensurability" differently. This definition is "able to be measured by a common standard; 'hours and minutes are commensurable'". My supervisors thought that my usage of commensurability was reasonable at the time that I was writing my thesis. However, I have grown very conscientious over the years about not using words without regard to what they actually mean, and I know that in some cases I definitely used words in an incorrect way. Some philosophers can really play silly buggers with words--such as Ayn Rand--and end up relying on arguments that rest on equivocations.

Can I, therefore, reconcile my definition of commensurability with the one that is found in the dictionary? Well, a claim that conduces to a non-coercive convergence of opinion is able to be measured by a common standard. That is, a claim that conduces to a non-coercive convergence of opinion between person A and person B is able to be measured by a common standard, that of rational discourse. This is because it is rational discourse that enables anyone to arrive at a non-coercive convergence of opinion. The more commensurable a claim is to rational discourse, therefore, the more conducive it is to a non-coercive convergence of opinion. The degrees by which it is commensurable to rational discourse, therefore, can be measured by means of my six distinct levels.

Admittedly, this is a very specific kind of commensurability, and I am sure that many others are possible. But this one is all that I require for my purposes.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Philosophy of Al Qaeda

People out there seem pretty interested in the philosophy of Al Qaeda. Three of my most recent hits have involved searches on those words. Mine is the top-ranked page when "Al-Qaeda" is spelled with a hyphen, and the second-ranked page when it is not. And my page was only referring to someone else's blog page in the first place! So let's talk about the philosophy of Al Qaeda. Paul Berman wrote an excellent article about it. He identifies Sayyid Qutb as the most important philosopher behind the movement. Qutb is Qaeda's intellectual hero, its "Karl Marx". In this respect, Qutb's best known work is Milestones , his Das Kapital . Berman, however, calls attention to Qutb's deeper work, the enormous In the Shade of the Koran . It is full of literary beauty and deep ideas. Just because ideas are deep, however, does not mean that they are true, and many of Qutb's ideas, Berman argues, are indeed false. Qutb opposes the separation of church and s
Read more

Am I a reductive or non-reductive naturalist?

I tried to get The Value of Knowledge and the Pursuit of Understanding from the university library today after work, but the library still has limited hours until 7th March. It won't be open after business hours until Tuesday, by which time I will be busy rehearsing for my play, so I won't really be able to get to the library until 8th March anyway. I was only curious about the term anyway. But if attitudinalism is meant to be similar to non-cognitivism, then I am sure I will not accept that as an approach to ethics, because as I understand it, ethical non-cognitivism means that moral statements have no truth-value, which I cannot believe. They do have a truth-value; it is simply what determines that truth-value that can be problematic. The difficulty of classifying any view as non-naturalistic is, at bottom, the cost of allowing non-reductive versions of naturalism. Excuse me, WTF is non-reductive naturalism?? Some lecture notes from the University of Michigan
Read more

Commensurability 5.0

Key concept: commensurability Dictionary Definition: measurability by a common standard (Based on definition of "commensurable" in WordNet 2.0 .) Substantive Account: of a claim, measurability of its truth or falsity by a common standard that falls along a continuum of degrees, or levels , of conduciveness to non-coercive agreement. I distinguish the following four levels: Level 1 Keyword: Commonality. UPDATE 2014/12/28: Could also be triviality. Necessary and sufficient condition: Pre-existing agreement about truth or falsity of claim. Examples: "The Pope is Catholic" is at level 1 because of pre-existing agreement of its truth. "The moon is made of green cheese" is at level 1 because of pre-existing agreement of its falsity. Additionally, non-trivial claims can be at level 1 relative to a particular discussion. For example, assumptions made in a scientific paradigm are at level 1 relative to all who share that paradigm. Level 2 Keywor
Read more