Erin,
You could really benefit from paying closer attention to the plain-text
of the passage being discussed....
The context that Pirsig clearly presents the John WoodenLeg story in is
as evidence for his theory about substance being missing from non-Greek
derivative cultures "For some time now he'd been thinking that if he were
looking for proof that "substance" is a cultural heritage from Ancient
Greece rather than absolute reality he should look at non-Greek derived
cultures. If the reality of substance was missing from those cultures that
would prove he was right. " I used the term 'evidence' because the story
clearly 'proves' nothing, but you'll note that in the actual quote Pirsig
uses the terms "...looking for PROOF..." and "...PROVE he was right"!!!!
So you when you write: "I don't claim he "proves" anything or was
trying to "prove" anything that is your type of goal" --- you have simply
demonstrated your sloppy reading skills. Pirsig's goal, by his own tongue,
was to PROVE his point. And if he made up the story about John and Laverne
and then offered it as PROOF of his idea, that's even more pathetic.
Just to be clear: the story is meant to be evidence of the fact that
"The whole idea of a dog as a member of a hierarchical structure of
intellectual categories known generically as 'objects' was outside [John
Wooden Leg's] traditional cultural viewpoint." Any other purposes you might
find in this story are your own; Pirsig is quite EXPLICIT that this point is
the thrust of the story and his argument. Once again, I personally don't
believe his story illustrates/proves/evidences any such point...
Just so you know, I looked up 'good' while writing a post for the
'Definition of Information' thread. The post never materialized, but I had
looked up 'Good', 'Quality' and 'Information' while preparing to write it.
It was at this time, and quite by accident, that I discovered what I did.
Finally, you wrote: "So I don't want you to wear an " I love Pirsig"
shirt but I would like you to stop presenting your expectations as
"Pirsig's"
Actually, Erin. I said about four times in those posts that what was
presented was my own reading and interpretation, that it could be wrong,
that difference of opinion is what makes 'horseracing', and that everyone
should decide for themselves.... I never presented my own "expectations" as
Pirsig's and the fact that you say I did offers insight into the level of
argumentation and reading comprehension of which you are capable. I
appreciate your participation, but please read more carefully from now on,
and stop making false accusations.
rick
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 - 16:01:43 BST