objective, subjective, and Lonergan

Man, I wish I were farther along in understanding Lonergan so that I could add his perspective to this great conversation going on between George Siemens and Stephen Downes. As I see it, Lonergan finds a new path (in reaction to a naive realism that says things are simply what they appear to be and avoiding the skepticism/solipsism of a radical intellectualism) by saying that objectivity grows out of one's faithful experiencing, understanding, judging, and choosing.

Cycling in May

I had great plans for a big trip east, but a flat tire at Drinkwater and the change in wind direction while I got it fixed squashed that. I did manage to get in 400 km during the month, but all in short trips to Moose Jaw, Mortlach, and Buffalo Pound. One 40 km MJ round trip took me 1 hour 25 minutes, my best time so far.

conversion

This is really preliminary and sketchy, but I was thinking this morning about how Don Ihde says in _Experimental Phenomenology_ that, once we've noticed something about an object (as when, in a "gestalt change" we see from a new perspective what are popularly thought of as optical illusions), we can never see it simply in "the old way" again. Where Kuhn talks about a radical paradigm shift, Lakatos says that kind of change happens more slowly as we take in the new information and add it to what we thought before and sometimes, over time, replace old with new. That would be true of the 3-dimensional sketches--as Ihde says, with attention to our own thought processes ("meta-cognition") and with practice, we can see both and even switch between perspectives (so it's almost like watching the object move). I think that's what Lonergan means when he talks about sublation--building upon, sometimes to the point of overturning/replacing, former beliefs.