From: Glenn Bradford (gmbbradford@netscape.net)
Date: Wed Jan 08 2003 - 04:38:18 GMT
Greetings,
Having been told that my name has been used here recently, I checked out
the archives and thought that I would counter one of the more offensive
moq belittlements.
HORSE:
Sun Jan 05 2003 - 21:38:26 GMT:
"On a happier note though positivism/scientism does appear to be losing
much of it's (sic) appeal because for most people it has very little to
say and attempts to degrade many activities which most hold in high
regard as meaningless. Philosophy, art, music, etc."
Despite the phrasing, it is reasonably clear that Horse thinks
positivism degrades art and music. He could, I suppose, claim not to be
one of the 'most people', but that would surely be dishonest for his
intent is obvious. Equally, 'scientism' like 'nigger' and 'SOM' is only
usually used as an insult and is almost the archetypal straw man, so I
will ignore it.
The claim that positivism seeks to degrade art is one of those common
well-worn insults which emanate from the philosophically uninformed, and
which is not only entirely wrong, but also an example of the kind of,
'spurious and incorrect claims and generalisations', that typify moq
propaganda. Positivists see art and music as being *upgraded* by their
philosophy, certainly not 'degraded'. Usually this insult derives from a
misunderstanding of the function of terms such as 'truth' and
'meaningless', the latter of which does NOT, in its technical
application, mean rubbish or pointless, but 'unable to be interpreted by
the system at hand' - in this case, science. Thus, to say that a moral
pronouncement (for example) is meaningless is simply to say that it
cannot be subjected to scientific analysis - a perfectly reasonable
claim. Those, such as Pirsig and Horse, who claim that positivists
attempt to degrade value (and art), not only create the most colossal of
straw men but also, we must remember:
HORSE:
'If someone makes a claim of this sort and then refuses to back it up
because the claim was false and knowingly so then this is intellectual
dishonesty of the worst sort. A smear campaign in other words.'
Horse is happy to call Glenn a liar when Glenn claims that Pirsig
belittles science, and then he himself accuses positivists of attempting
to belittle art and music. Yet Horse provides no evidence to
substantiate this spurious and malicious claim.
Let Horse live up to his own professed standards and provide some
evidence in the form of quotations from positivists who attempt to
degrade art and music. Not from the likes of Pirsig, or other critics of
positivism who have their own axe to grind, but (as Horse demands of
Glenn) from the positivists themselves.
Evidence please Horse, or take your own advice to John:
HORSE:
'. . .if you believe that smear campaigns are the way to conduct a
debate then you should go elsewhere.'
Of course, Horse is being entirely disingenuous here as he knows that
smear campaigns are part and parcel of the way both he and Pirsig
present their ideas, as has been made clear once more by Horse's
unprovoked and vindictive response to Glenn.
Struan
P.S. I will be unable to enter into discussion online as Horse refuses
to allow me to subscribe. Questions and arguments put to me on this
forum will therefore remain unanswered. Sorry.
__________________________________________________________________
The NEW Netscape 7.0 browser is now available. Upgrade now! http://channels.netscape.com/ns/browsers/download.jsp
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
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 Jan 08 2003 - 04:38:47 GMT