Hi Platt and Squad
You wrote:
>
> First, I wonder if members of the LS agree with the general proposition
> suggested by Grayling that philosophy boils down to these two basic
> ideas.
I actually like your "The search for underlying assumptions" from feb 21
better. But it usually end up with those two questions anyway.
> Second, it seems obvious that the MOQ falls directly under the scope of
> the first idea in that it espouses a "transcendent source of value.”
Grayling says, "The two are linked", but the MoQ says "The two are the same".
(The physical order of the universe is also the moral order of the universe.)
Since the moral order is the unusual approach this gets more attention, but I
don't think either one is more important than the other.
> Third, when Grayling said, "The idea of reality prompts questions about
> knowledge, truth and meaning -- in short the relation of mind to the world
> ..." I gagged at his "relation of mind to the world" assertion. We
> Pirsigians can spot a subject/object assumption a mile away, making me
> wonder just how many so-called academic philosophers in the colleges
> today recognize that "relation of mind to the world" is just an assumption,
> nothing more, and a most questionable assumption at that. Not many I
> wager.
I have a feeling they are denying that relation, at least as a primary
duality, and try to come up with various other assumptions to make that
relation secondary and tighter.
Magnus
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:34 BST