To: David B, Denis (&Platt)
From: Roger
DENIS P:
You want to remember that the Static/Dynamic
split isn't a "reality" (whatever this means) but a useful
intellectual pattern of value, that enables us to make
distinctions about our experiences, and the way we assign
good or bad values to them. Man is the measure of things
static and dynamic. Beyond this is Quality, about which the
less said the better.
DAVID B:
I'm not sure how much detail I can go into in this post. I don't have much
time, but there are two major points where we disagree. If I read your most
recent post correctly, we disagree about the static/Dynamic split. You seem
to be saying it is just a matter of our perceptions. And I think you go way
too far with the concept of "many truths". Together they have the effect of
saying that reality is just in our heads AND the truth is just whatever we
like. What a mess!
ROGER P:
Now that we have reached a consensus on free will, do you want to bring up
this nature-of-reality issue again?
I disagree with David that the effect of Denis' statements above leads to
"reality is just in our heads AND the truth is just whatever we
like." Reality is direct experience. The final arbiter of truth is direct
experience.
I agree completely with Denis' quote (and even forgive him for his bad choice
of words regarding 'actual patterns' a few days ago ;-)) To quote Pirsig,
both the MOQ and SOM are "simply intellectual patterns for interpreting
reality." The dynamic/static split is just "a better set of coordinates with
which to interpret the world".
Rog
PS -- I have no comment to Platt or Denis' posts yesterday other than that we
appear in complete agreement
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:38 BST