Hi John B. and all,
JOHN B. writes
> Pirsig in ZMM suggests that everyone recognizes quality when they see it,
> and then destroys his own argument with his test with his writing class -
two students chose
> the supposedly low quality text as the best.
We should allow for some fuzziness - people "tend" to recognise the same
quality, but there are always exceptions.
A group of individuals will tend towards a particular choice. Certain
individuals may dissent. The general trend is an observation - pretty much
an empirical fact! Children unarguably tend to prefer potato chips to
spinach.
> How do we show them they are wrong? As
> someone has already said re this issue, it is not a case for majority
votes, or the Bruni would
> have been in the wrong. This is a fundamental issue.
They may not be wrong. Either the minority failed to consider some aspect,
or it is the majority who failed. Opinions are coloured by ignorance, and
may change as the ignorance is pushed back. Of course, opinions can also
change due to misinformation !!! (any advertisers out there?).
JOHN B.
>If our opinions are all of equal value, and are equally relative,
> then our debate becomes an amusement, with no significance at all.
>
> I do not believe this is the case. However, I will readily concede that
much of what I or
> anybody else holds to be self evident may well prove to be projection.
Indeed, but the projections are themselves open to evaluation. We can CHOOSE
which projections seem most likely.
[snip]
> But this is a moral tale. Was Leuchter evil? I say yes.
I don't know the details of the case, but it sounds like he is one of a long
line of Holocaust deniers. They ask us to ignore the overwhelming evidence
of our own eyes and ears. Fortunately, few people are taken in.
Jonathan
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:35 BST