Hi Sean,
SEAN
The thing with history is that is subjective to the people
> there. For instance you and I could both witness the same event so then
> we both would have our own perspectives on what occurred. Neither one
> of us is wrong in the sense because there is no absolute truth which is
> what I believe Mr. Pirsig was saying with his books. For instance in
> Lila the Victorians believed that people should act one way and that was
> with the highest moral sense in their opinion. While others acted
> differently. neither group was more or less right. one was just
> stagnant and unwilling to grow but that did not make them wrong.
RICK
These comments are all irrelevant to the issue being discussed in this
thread. You seem to have confused the whole point of the hypothetical. The
point is about how to choose between competing values of the same level. In
this case, the competing values are 'accuracy' and 'clarity'. If you're
interested in discussing 'absolute truth' try reading the 'Truth and
Reality' thread that Platt and I have been developing for the last week or
so.
SEAN
> I think in response to your question Newspaper 1 has more intellectual
> quality if that is in fact what Mr. Armstrong said.... the truth to the
speaker should have the highest
> intellectual significance so newspaper 1 has more quality.
RICK
Okay, this is relevant, but it's little more than a contention. Now... see
it through... WHY is an 'incomprehensible but historically accurate'
newspaper story of higher intellectual value than a 'comprehensible but less
accurate' one?
thanks for your response
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 - 16:01:48 BST