Subject: personal

From: Mark Sulkowski <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 1994 18:55:43 -0500 (EST)

To: Bryan Douglas Caplan <[email-masked]>

I posted this message earlier:
>>1. The morality-math analogy.  I'm not sure why Sulkowski places
>>exclusive emphasis on my mathematics example; if you recall my original
>>posting, I also adduced two decidedly non-mathematical instances of the
>>use of direct reason.
>
>	That's correct.  I do remember that.  However, you specifically
>stated that since direct reason worked for you in math, then there was
>no reason to suppose it didn't work in morality -- a claim I dispute.
>
>[......................]
>	As to your question of whether philosophy fails without direct
>reason, I will state again that I am not quite sure what you believe
>direct reason to be.  Philosophy relies on conceptual thinking and
>(hopefully) perceptual evidence.  What else is necessary?

	In case you responded to this already, I didn't get the response.
My account has been filling up on occasion.  If you still have a copy of
it, send it to me in email.  If you haven't posted it yet, send me a
carbon copy in email.  Thanks!

Mark       | "Simplicity and truth of character are not produced by the
Andrew     | constraint of laws, nor by the authority of the state, and
Sulkowski  | absolutely no one can be forced or legislated into a state
           | of blessedness; the means required are faithful and brotherly
Sec/Treas  | admonition, sound education, and, above all, free use of the
  NFLP     | individual judgment."  -- Spinoza