Horse,
I quoted David Deutsch:
<<
> <<<<"Science is a process not of deriving predictions from observations,
but
> of finding explanations">>>>>
You responded:
<<<<<<
Science excels at description and is able to explain in a limited sense but
where
it, quite spectacularly, fails to explain is why events and process should
occur in
the first place. Reasoning from first principles seems to be given a special
(lack
of) meaning. Please don't misinterpret my cynical attitude toward science as
most of my academic background is science based and in general I am
supportive of much of science and technology ......>>>>>>>
I completely agree with the limitations on science, and that it too makes
certain metaphysical assumptions. In fact, the author of this quote goes on
to explain the importance of some of these metaphysical assumptions and on how
important a proper world view is in not just science, but in logic, ethics,
aesthetics etc. He does take some turns later on in his metaphysics that I
think we would both disagree with, but i learned from his approach and plan on
exploring it more real soon.
You then quote me:
> My fourth point deals with Diana's mention of the aesthetic side of the MOQ,
> and that focusing on just one side perpetuates the myth. Perhaps, but I
also
> fear that MOQ will never be accepted if it appears too aesthetic or
> mystical.......Zen , Quality and Morality are terms that are dismissed as
> subjective new age crap by much of our intended audience. Are we prepared
to
> remove these terms?
Horse adds.......
<<<<<<
If Quality and Morality are to be "dismissed as subjective new age crap by
much
of our intended audience" then our intended audience can collectively screw
itself. Personally, I am not prepared to remove these terms as they are the
basis
of the MoQ. We would be left with Mo? >>>>>>
I love it! I of course am not willing to believe in the metaphysics of
MO.......I'm sure you noted my next sentence that I wasn't recommending this.
But I love your passion!
By the way, I also totally disagree with my Weinberg quote .......both points
were just to show what our intended audience may think and to identify if it
is even possible to work within their paradigms. By the way I suspect it
may be possible.........but I am not sure....any other thoughts LS? Ant's
Forum posting on MOQ is one excellent place to start .
Horse then says:
>>>>>>>>>The major point of the MoQ is to unite all areas of human endeavour
and produce a unified perspective.>>>>>>>
I could not have said it better. I believe we need to move forward with
Diana's challenge and supply the world with a convincing unified perspective.
Convincing to both them and us.
Roger New Age Mo' Parker
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 - 16:02:35 BST