A stipulative definition of 'commensurability'

Note once again that 'commensurability' means 'measureable by a common standard'. I now consider that all of my four levels involve stronger or weaker ways by which things are measured by a common standard.

I think that the strongest common standard is an existing convergence of opinion. Where there is an existing convergence of opinion for or against a proposition, there is a disincentive against rational discourse about that subject. Why would one want to argue for or against a proposition when the other side already agrees with you? There is no practical point to discourse under those circumstances, and in practice it would not happen. This standard therefore rightly belongs at level 1.

Conversely, I also think that the weakest common standard is human sympathy. Sympathy serves to shield a view from rational discourse, which as any professional philosopher knows can be emotionally brutal. Rational discourse may still be possible if both sides agree to it, but sympathy renders this an optional, not an inevitable, component. This standard, therefore, rightly seems to belong at level 4.

Note, therefore, that levels 1 and 4 represent the upper and lower limits of rational discourse, respectively. At level 1, rational discourse is barred through lack of interest in the argument. At level 4, rational discourse is barred through sympathy with the person with whom one dissents. It is only the middle two levels at which rational discourse is practically possible, because it is rational discourse that is necessary to produce either agreement or intellectual respect.

Therefore, I can now provide a stipulative definition of 'commensurability' that is a proper subset of its standard definition. It is 'measurable by a common standard that is conducive to a non-coercive convergence of opinion'. Degrees of commensurability, therefore, are measured in terms of the degrees of conduciveness to that convergence. I count existing consensus as a kind of convergence on the grounds that its natural tendency is to remain convergent. I count appreciability as a form of conduciveness, because a person can be moved to adopt an view out of appreciability.

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

Actions Speak Louder Than Words

Do you see any conflict between your spending considerable money on the care of your mother and your principle of spreading out wealth to help the most people? Yes. In a sense, my spending money on my mother's care is in conflict with that principle. But so is the fact that I flew back to Australia to visit my daughters at Christmas. That money could also be better spent elsewhere. I've never claimed that I live my life perfectly in accordance with those principles of sharing my money as much as I should. Interview with Peter Singer by Princeton Alumni Weekly , January 26, 2000. Is Peter Singer a hypocrite? Lonnie Lee Best, from his excellent web page on " The Psychology of Hypocrisy ", defines a hypocrite as 'a person whose actions contradict his or her stated or internal beliefs. (Or vice versa.)' From the sections on " Singer's Mother " and " Singer's Donations ", it seems clear enough that Singer falls into this cat
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