From: Matt the Enraged Endorphin (mpkundert@students.wisc.edu)
Date: Mon Oct 14 2002 - 22:57:58 BST
Thomas, Platt,
Thomas, I think you bring up a good point when you say, "where does this
account of experience leave us? What are we? Are we results from
experience?" I think the conception of experience that Pirsig and Platt
are pushing is one that is synonymous with Reality and so loses its old
meaning. Because, if it keeps its old meaning, your questions are a bit
debilitating to this interpretation. Particularly in light of Pirsig's own
attempt to put back into descriptions of mass amounts of experience the
observer. In my other post to Platt in this thread, I quoted Pirsig's
first observation about the classic mode of understanding. Pirsig's second
observation is, "that the observer is missing [in the classic mode of
understanding]." Pirsig's whole enterprise can be seen as an attempt to
put back the observer into Objectivity, make his concerns (read: morals)
real, and make it all relational. Platt wants to interpret this
relationality as correspondence to a privileged Reality. The pragmatist
wants to interpret this relationality as context dependent.
Matt
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 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 10:37:58 GMT