MD MOQ and Logic/Science

From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Sat Aug 21 2004 - 16:48:39 BST

  • Next message: ml: "Re: Off-topic? physical pain vs. suffering (was Re: MD MOQ and The Problem Of Evil)"

    Hi Ian, Platt, Paul, and all,

    I've started a new thread, for obvious reasons.

    On 20 Aug 2004 at 22:23, Ian Glendinning wrote:

    What I'm amazed by, given that this is an MOQ discussion board that
    so many people defend the SOM logic.

    msh says:
    Well, I guess we'll have to call this particular formulation of
    dismissal a "Turnerism." Except, when Paul used it, I agreed: You
    can't deny that Quality is the cause of both subjects and objects,
    and still be talking about the MOQ.

    However, Ian and others here seem to be saying that logic and
    science, because they refrain from making "value" judgements, are
    themselves of no value. I respectfully argue that Pirsig himself
    does not believe this. There are countless passages in both ZMM and
    LILA where he uses science and logic to develop and support his
    ideas. The MOQ itself is a perfectly logical construction absorbing
    and expanding the ideas of physics, evolutionary biology, and
    anthropology, to name a few.

    So, I think it's a mistake to think that the MOQ somehow negates
    logic and science. Rather, the evaluative limitations of scientific
    and logical thinking are brought to light, and the MOQ is offered as
    a better (of higher explanatory Quality) but inclusive alternative to
    SOM. That the MOQ includes rather than dismisses SOM can be seen
    from these passages (and Pirsig quotes) from Ant McWatt's
    dissertation:

    "A significant contrast is constructed by Pirsig between ‘subject-
    object metaphysics’ (SOM) and the Metaphysics of Quality (MOQ). As
    discussed in Chapter One, the principal reason for the development of
    the MOQ was to revise the metaphysical foundations of American
    anthropology which had developed from the ‘objective’ functionalist
    approach of Franz Boas. ‘This may sound as though a purpose of the
    Metaphysics of Quality is to trash all subject-object thought but
    that’s not true’ (Pirsig, 1991, p.103). It appears that Pirsig
    asserts this because the MOQ is constructed as a system that places
    SOM in a wider metaphysical context rather than rejecting the system
    wholesale. (McWatt 3.0)"

    And this, from Lila's Child RMP Annotation 4, where Dan Glover points
    out: "... subjects and objects are a species of the MOQ but no longer
    the top division of a presumed metaphysics. The presumed metaphysics
    of Western culture (SOM) has now been embedded in a larger system
    (MOQ) with a much greater resulting clarity that could be obtained
    using either system of thought by itself."

    Here's Pirsig's response:
    "... I began to see it’s not necessary to get rid of them [subjects
    and objects] because the MOQ can encase them neatly within its
    structure - the upper two levels being subjective, and the lower two,
    objective. Still later I saw that the subject-object distinction is
    very useful for sharply distinguishing between biological and social
    levels... At present, I don’t see that the terms ‘subject’ and
    ‘object’ need to be dropped, as long as we remember they are just
    levels of value, not expressions of independent scientific reality."

    I think Platt is right: the MOQ in no way requires us to abandon
    logic, (or science or even SOM), and the short quote he provides from
    LILA-8 is right on:

    "The tests of truth are logical consistency, agreement with
    experience, and economy of explanation."

    This is, to me, an important issue, so thanks in advance to all for
    any thoughtful comments.

    Best,
    Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
    --
    InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
    Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
    Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com

    "Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is
    everything." -- Henri Poincare'

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    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 : Sat Aug 21 2004 - 16:48:25 BST