tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6535481649727720492.post1458459361149493713..comments2024-03-27T21:43:02.451-04:00Comments on NEW SAVANNA: From Objects to PluralismBill Benzonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08360044945265178991noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6535481649727720492.post-28749949609703147682012-07-19T13:31:04.674-04:002012-07-19T13:31:04.674-04:00Hi Terry,
On both the issues you mention I'm ...Hi Terry,<br /><br />On both the issues you mention I'm willing to let empirical evidence decide.<br /><br />Specifically, about relations, I don't think we're going to get far simply thinking in terms of relations as though all relations are the same. They're not. But what kinds of relations do we need? That's not obvious to me.<br /><br />For example, we know that birds Bill Benzonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08360044945265178991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6535481649727720492.post-43975100399627107642012-07-19T12:54:38.534-04:002012-07-19T12:54:38.534-04:00Hello Bill,
I am of course sympathetic to the prog...Hello Bill,<br />I am of course sympathetic to the program that you announce in the title, and to your notion of multiple realms. I am glad that you agree that the language of withdrawal is a bad idea, and that you espouse the language of fecundity and abundance. The only points of divergence I have are<br />1) "objects" seems to me to pre-decide on the nature of the elements of the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com