John
> The important point, which is very difficult to make, that lies below this
> charade, is that any metaphysics is human centred.
Though I agreed with your point, it's a given. Charade maybe a game you
like but it not one of mine. My concern was and is more subtle than
that. I'm begining to see it's tied up in what I will call the
"dominion" issue or "rights" issue as it applies to the level to level
hierarchy and the problems this can create in a future oriented
philosophy. Not so much as a problem with what is, but what might be,
good. But I need to think on it.
> I think
> Wilber has the better explanatory system, which agres with your assessment,
> 3WD, that "even though Wilbur's "internal/ external" take may have problems
> it still has less of them than Pirsig's".
And on the other hand Pirsig's use of Quality and Dynamic Quality as
opposes to using the Buddhist/Tao term "Spirit" moves it away from a
particular religious tradition which surely reduces Wilbur's
palatability in many quarters. I also think Pirsig's use of the term
"value" as an integrator for all levels of reality approaches the
simplicity needed to help it pass Poincare's test of being
understandable to a four year old. Though it seems we haven't passed yet.
3WD
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 - 16:02:15 BST