John
I just finished and sent my vitriolic response to the other Davids and found
your reasonable and calming post. Thank's, sometimes my rhetoric passion
dissolves the quality.
When you suggest that:
> David T is seeking "to develop a complete "value" based moral philosophy"
> which he does not find in Pirsig. I think he is correct in his assertion,
> but I wonder if such a moral philosophy would really meet his needs.
My hopes are really much more modest than "a complete value based moral
philosopy." Since my profession and passion, architecture, straddles that
line between "ART" and "SOCIETY" after over 25 years of doing it, I would
settle for just a glimpse how one might find a consistant way to do it with quality.
While theories increasing abound, quality manifestions of our dwelling, by and
large do not. Like doctors, the number of architects in Western society is as
high as it has every been, but just like healthcare it is difficult to find
that this increase has markedly contributed to a improved "quality of life" in
our environment. So I ask, as many before me have "Why is this?"
I don't have the answers and maybe the search is futile, but I'm looking
anyway, it seems to be the quality thing to do.
DLT
PS: For those interested in the relationships between philosophy and
architectural theory I highly recommend "Theory of Architecture-Concepts,
Themes, & Practices, by Australian architect and professor, Paul-Alan Johnson.
published by Van Nostrand Reinhold in 1994.
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:13 BST