Hi Matt B:
> on 9/29/02 10:45 AM, Platt Holden brought forth the following from the
> ugyldig:
>
> > Haven't read ZMM in a long time but in that book didn't Pirsig make a
> > universal split he called classic and romantic, a split he specifically
> > abandoned in Lila for Dynamic and static.?
>
> That doesn't make the split wrong, or any less true. It just means that it
> was more useful for his purposes in ZMM, and that the Dynamoc/static split
> was more useful for his purposes in Lila.
If that's what you want to believe, fine. But it's not what he says. From
Chap. 9:
"Phaedrus finally abandoned this classic-romantic split as a choice for a
primary division of the Metaphysics of Quality. The division he finally
settled on was one he didn't really choose in any deliberative way. It
was more as if it chose him."
When someone "abandons" something and "settles on" something
else, it's because, in MOQ terms, it's better. That makes what was
abandoned for something better less true, less right.
Postmodern Rorty fans who like to see things in pragmatic (useful)
terms might want to review what Pirsig says about pragmatism in Chap.
29.
Platt
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 - 16:06:36 BST