And we're back. I am emerging briefly, from the mess of architectural aesthetics I have got myself into, to answer readers' queries.
For all this talk of Kant and Eliot, the most crucial issue seems to be Martha and the Muffins. Southern Dave has been downloading while Peter from Jute City has been nostalaging about The Associates (soon, Peter, we shall have Scottish Music Month).
Meanwhile, Matthew Flannagan takes me to task about Kant. To clarify, I fully accept that Kant was a forerunner to Post Modernism; but then, Kant was a forerunner to everything. What I do not accept is Maxim's confusion of Kant and Nietzsche with PoMo and their suggestion that Rorty was a Post Modernist himself. However, I do agree with Mr Flannagan about Plato and Socrates. Having suffered more of Dr Cooke's sermons on Humanism than most, I can only conclude that everything Dr Cooke says about Philosophy is bollocks; quite a few members of the New Zealand Association of Rationalists and Humanists (Inc) would agree with me. Some time back, I realised that Dr Cooke's views on Philosophy amounted to the following:
- Kant = religious, therefore Bad
- Heidegger = wrong kind of Atheist, proto-PoMo, therefore Bad
- Sartre = not really an Atheist
- Mario Bunge [who he?] = Good
- Iris Murdoch [yes, really] = Fabulous
- Greeks = Humanists
It is all a vast circle of something (or other).