Hi Dave, Denis, and Angus,
Thanks for the responses. I am still not sure what I meant by "The higher
levels of moral development are indeed 'better'." It feels right but is too
loosely expressed.
Dave, I liked your statement that "as your static patterns evolve your view
of the dynamic changes." This puts it very well.
Angus, I agree that putting Pirsig in context is valuable. I don't have the
background in philosophy to do this. Perhaps you could provide an essay on
this theme for the forum?
I am still thinking about your statement "If the GOOD is a noun, and man has
experiences with life that shows this goodness personally to this man, he
will pragmatically act with morality if you follow James'/Pirsig's
philosophy." I am still uncomfortable that the GOOD is some reified value,
and as much a matter of faith as God. The asumption still seems to be that
man meets GOOD, and does what is right, whereas I find morality is quite
different in my experience.
I am not quite sure what it would mean to chuck away the lens that confuses.
Can you elaborate?
Thanks for the kind words, Denis.
Regards,
John B
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
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 - 16:01:34 BST