Greetings,
I thought I had been clear on all this before Jonathan and, once again, I
didn't see much purpose in repeating myself when it is all there in the
archives. There is a difference between ignoring something and having
nothing new to say about it. Your initial posting which sparked off your
accusations of hypocrisy and of ignoring you, didn't even ask me a question,
so I am a tad surprised that you are continuing to chastise me for it. But,
perhaps I misunderstand. In order for me to clarify whether I have or not,
could you explain to me exactly what 'tool' Pirsig's framework provides? Is
it simply that more complex patterns are more moral because they 'encompass
a wider viewpoint than less complex patterns'? If so, could you explain how
one would use this tool to come to a moral conclusion about anything without
encountering the same terminal problems Pirsig did in Lila? Bearing in mind
the following objections (and these constitute reasons why I reject your
exposition of one small part of Pirsig's framework):
1) Morality is concerned only with human behaviour. To believe otherwise
degrades morality. (I have been through this in some detail previously).
2) Given the above, this talk of the relationship between levels is moot in
ethical discussion. There is no rational sense in which a leaf has moral
priority over a stone for example. Equally, as humans are composed of all
levels at once it is impossible to be consistent in moral pronouncements (as
Pirsig's failure to provide coherent examples demonstrates).
3) If you want to derive what we *ought* to do from the *fact* of
complexity, you need to give a good reason why you are doing so. 'Starting'
from a Quality position is not sufficient if you want to establish Quality
as the primary empirical reality. Pirsig clearly realised that he had to try
and prove it if anyone half reasonable were to take him seriously. As I
don't consider the concept of everything being Quality is a coherent one,
let alone the actuality, you will see that this is another reason why I
reject the framework.
Now what have I missed that you can tell me off for again?
Struan
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 - 16:00:58 BST