From: Elizaphanian (Elizaphanian@members.v21.co.uk)
Date: Wed Nov 20 2002 - 10:16:24 GMT
Hi Matt,
I referred to Pirsig's comment to support your general thrust (I can't now
find the actual quotation though - I hope I'm not misleading anyone; I may
be thinking of his comments that philosophical idealism is the best way to
understand the MoQ).
However, you summarise your position as: "A more accurate statement is that
we can't have knowledge of a pre-linguistic reality." Which I would say is -
we can't talk about something without using language, which is a tautology.
Are you arguing for something more than that, ie that all our awareness is
necessarily linguistic?
Forgive me if I've missed the crucial bits from your previous posts; I do
read them with interest and much sympathy, but my main attention has been
elsewhere in the last six weeks or so (grin); it's now returning to other
things. In any case, dialogue is surely the best way to clarify things, so
please indulge me if I'm asking you to repeat stuff.
Sam
www.elizaphanian.v-2-1.net/home.html
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 : Wed Nov 20 2002 - 10:14:08 GMT