RE: MD Systematic about the Sophists

From: Matt the Enraged Endorphin (mpkundert@students.wisc.edu)
Date: Sun Dec 22 2002 - 16:11:55 GMT

  • Next message: David Buchanan: "RE: MD Systematic about the Sophists"

    DMB,

    In answer to the dilemma I posed, you chose to follow Bo in repudiating
    that bit of ZMM or, rather, translating it or updating it or, dare I say,
    strongly misreading it. This is, obviously, perfectly exceptable.
    However, I don't think you've fully realized the consequences of your choice.

    I said before that, "the mythos-over-logos argument is the argument for
    continuity between Reason and Myth, logos and mythos, dialectic and
    rhetoric." As I understand, that's what the argument represents. No
    discrete break. The MoQ argues for a discrete break. So, I agree when you
    say, "There really is no problem with the logos being BOTH emergent from
    and different than the mythos." Certainly. Never claimed there was. I
    said, "Indeed, there isn't a problem with emergence. Its when the
    mythos-over-logos argument continues by saying, 'Thus, logos is simply a
    continuation of the mythos,' that a problem emerges." The MoQ can say that
    logos is emergent from the mythos. That's not controversial. That was the
    typical interpretation offered by the Greeks all the way to the present
    until people started offering the mythos-over-logos argument in contrast to
    the usual interpretation. The interpretation that the MoQ offers is
    essentially logos-over-mythos. The Intellect level is morally superior to
    the Social level. The mythos-over-logos interpretation says that neither
    is morally superior over the other.

    On the interpretation you wish to give, I think you must get rid of the
    mythos-over-logos argument because it simply does not fit. Pirsig would've
    been right if he had said that the MoQ agrees with the mythos-over-logos
    thesis INSOFAR as the logos and intellect level are emergent out of the
    mythos and social level, respectively. But that assertion isn't really the
    core of the mythos-over-logos argument. The "mythos OVER logos" part is.

    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 : Sun Dec 22 2002 - 16:06:25 GMT