Platt,
> Experience as used by Pirsig refers to each individual's experience and
> observed data, not the collective knowledge of our times.
Am I wrong, or is experienced as referred to by Pirsig inclusive of both of these? I believe in analogy he draws between reality and a train, he stresses embracing both the cutting edge of dynamic change and experience as well as the following cars of knowledge. Whether these cars of knowledge are of a personal/individual nature or a collective, I think, is of no concequence so long as the collective knowledge is not dogmatized or otherwise abused. Personally, I find that individual experience and observed information can create a dismissive, thick-skinned sort of mentality without open consideration of collective knowledge.
> Universal static moral patterns are absolutely necessary for anything to
> survive. If quantum particles go, we all go.
Could you be a little more specific? Are you suggesting that subatomic particles make decisions based upon moral patterns? As far as my understanding goes, the scientific world is still not certain whether or not they truly behave this way, or if they are merely giving the illusion of having their own free will. (And I'm probably wrong, it's likely you're not talking about this at all, so I'll step back and let you answer.)
Kevin,
> The cry for Solidarity is the appeal for the inclusion of experience,
> rather than the exclusion of experience.
Solidarity's a problem. The Catholic church in its old glory days wanted solidarity, a monochromatic population of good Catholics (and, of course, to remain in power over the people), and we all know how wonderfully that went.
I've noticed you've capitalized the word in question. Are you using it in a different sense than I am used to?
> Even if we were to compare an Idea for agreement with
> the entirety of recorded human literature it would still be "out of date"
> the instant someone somewhere writes something new.
With the entirety of human literature? That's a lot of contradictory information, and in my eyes is completely impossible ... could we ever find agreement between white supremacy literature and that of the mind-your-own-business literature of Taoism? A new idea causing an older canonized one to become outdated is hardly an issue.
A single idea, whether it corresponds with all human literature and/or all human ways of thinking, sounds like a horrible state of things in the world to me. In a world of dynamic change this kind of intellectual imperialism would never fit or function. (Or was that your point?)\
--Nate
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
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 : Fri Oct 25 2002 - 16:06:34 BST