RE: MD Empiricism

From: Scott Roberts (jse885@earthlink.net)
Date: Wed Nov 17 2004 - 20:26:37 GMT

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "RE: RE: MD Wisconsin School OKs Creationism Teaching"

    Simon,

    > I recommend reading ZMM. In it you will find that Pirsig proposes, with
    the
    > help of Jules Henri Poincare, that the choice of conventions and axioms
    from
    > which mathematical truths are derived is made on the basis of
    > preintellectual value. Mathematical truths are thus patterns of values.
    > Value is phenomenal, it is sense experience. Therefore, mathematical
    truths
    > are verified by sense experience. Reason itself is a pattern of values.

    [Scott:] Please tell me how sense experience verifies that no ratio of
    integers is the square root of 2. I would also deny that value is a sense
    experience. It rides along with all sense experience, and with reason. Nor
    is it phenomenal. The point of the MOQ is that value precedes the
    phenomenal/noumenal distinction.

    I agree with Pirsig and Poincare, except to point out the following:
    - I do not distinguish between convention and reality. By setting
    conventions we create mathematical reality, and so, I claim, does Quality
    create all reality. As such, it can also be called Reason. Pirsig keeps
    saying (in Lila) that intellect, by making distinctions, covers up "pure
    experience", while I am saying that making distinctions is how everything
    is created.
    - I see no justification on Pirsig's part for calling the basis for choice
    among possible conventions "preintellectual". Better, I think, to call it
    Creative Intellect, or something along those lines.

    One other thing: You quoted:

    > Poincaré concluded that the axioms of geometry are conventions, our
    choice
    > among all possible conventions is guided by experimental facts, but it
    > remains free and is limited only by the necessity of avoiding all
    > contradiction. Thus it is that the postulates can remain rigorously true
    > even though the experimental laws that have determined their adoption are
    > only approximative. The axioms of geometry, in other words, are merely
    > disguised definitions.

    From a mathematical point of view, there is no choice guided by
    experimental facts. There is only choice guided by mathematical interest.
    That is, we reject axioms that don't lead any where interesting, but accept
    those that do. All geometries that don't immediately collapse into
    triviality are equally valid. It is physics that chooses one over the other
    based on experiment, not mathematics.

    - Scott

    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 : Wed Nov 17 2004 - 21:15:24 GMT