From: Kevin (kevin@xap.com)
Date: Thu Jan 09 2003 - 18:57:22 GMT
Platt said:
Despite the protestations of you gentlemen against the existence of
absolutes I'd like to point out that you each employ many absolute
statements in your arguments against absolutism, thus becoming
hoisted on your own petards. For example:
Kevin:
Semantics. Please preface every sentence in that last post which
contains an absolute with the phrase "Based on all recognized data it
would appear that.." and you have your answer.
This is the fundamental separation between our POV's, I believe.
I'm perfectly willing (and dare I say Matt, Mari, Jon and any other
"relativists" around here are also willing) to accept the notion that we
are perfectly capable of determining what is Best from all recognized
data. If you'd like to call that an "absolute", fine. But I think you'd
be guilty of redefining "absolute" from it's traditional usage.
I'd also like to challenge your oft repeated charge that accepting this
notion (that we choose what is Best from all recognized data and
therefore are not in possession of Absolute Truth) somehow causes moral
paralysis. On the contrary, to choose Best from all recognized data is
courageous morality, i.e. to choose in spite of doubt.
As I see it, the real power of Pirsig's ideas is to empower us as
fallible humans with incomplete data to stop being dominated by our
doubts and start choosing. Exploding the notions that we are somehow
distant from some Ultimate Reality and therefore incapable of Ultimate
Knowledge is one of the central themes of his project. He says (as you
are always wise to point out) that our immediate experience _IS_
reality. In fact, it's all the reality we need to make all of these
tough decisions. Not only can we feel comfortable that our immediate
experience is enough to choose what is Best, but we can rationally
justify such choices because reality itself is constituted of such
choices. Pirsig provides a means of learning to trust our choices in
spite of doubt.
Waiting for the absence of doubt is moral paralysis.
The absence of doubt is NOT the realization of Absolute Truth. It's
merely an exercise in delusion. To lack doubt is to refuse to accept
additional data. It's a closed system. It's incapable of change. It's
unresponsive to DQ. It's dead. To assume Absolute Truth from all
available data is folly at best and tyranny at worst.
With primal doubts but willing to make Quality Choices,
Kevin
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 : Thu Jan 09 2003 - 18:57:50 GMT