RE: MD MOQ and Logic/Science

From: Paul Turner (paul@turnerbc.co.uk)
Date: Mon Aug 23 2004 - 10:24:12 BST

  • Next message: Scott Roberts: "Re: MD Re: Non-empiricist definition of DQ"

    Hi Ian, Mark

    Ian Glendinning wrote:
    Interestingly, Pirsig's accounts of anthropology stress the work of
    Dusenberry and Sidis, and their break with treating anthropology as a
    "science". Science is one thing, "social science" is however a myth.

    Paul:
    This isn't the complete picture. Pirsig said that you can't explain
    patterns of culture with the laws of physics. That is, if science is
    based on the metaphysical assumption that everything is substance, then,
    as Ian says, "social science is a myth."

    However, in Chapter 8, Pirsig is happy to see the "Theory of
    Anthropology" platypus fall as a result of his value-based metaphysics:

    "If science is a study of substances and their relationships, then the
    field of cultural anthropology is a scientific absurdity....But if
    science is a study of stable patterns of value, then cultural
    anthropology becomes a supremely scientific field." [LILA Ch8]

    Regards

    Paul

    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 : Mon Aug 23 2004 - 15:52:36 BST