From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sun Jan 09 2005 - 13:28:13 GMT
Hi Ham,
> Except for cyberneticists, I
> don't know of anyone in the field of science or otherwise who would agree
> that computer processing is "experience". I certainly don't.
To believe that only scientific claims are meaningful is scientism as
defined by the Skeptic's Dictionary that you quote. Merriam-Webster
defines scientism as "an exaggerate trust in the efficacy of the methods
of natural science." Pirsig thankfully frees us from the stifling limits
such scientism. Your appeal to "anyone in the field of science or
otherwise" as the sole arbiters of physical reality smacks of scientism.
> And why does he have to "expand" the term "'consciousness" by adding
> "mystic" to awareness? What's wrong with ordinary everyday awareness?
IMO ordinary everyday awareness is no different than mystic awareness. I'm
not sure how Pirsig defines "mystic awareness." He seems to connect it to
awareness of Dynamic Quality, the cutting edge of everyday, ordinary
experience, i.e., what we know before we know anything else.
> But regardless of how Pirsig chooses to theorize his philosophy -- and
> Lila's Child from which your quote comes, I believe, is the work of Dan
> Glover -- the point in all this, as Hoffman and Tolstoy have suggested, is
> that physical reality is the content of conscious awareness.
First, the quote is from Pirsig who annotated what contributors to this
forum said about his metaphysics. Why don't you get a copy of "Lila's
Child"? Second, If physical reality is the content of conscious awareness,
such awareness must be present at the physical level, as Pirsig says, or
the physical world didn't exist until life emerged to observe it, a
dubious idea.
> Thus, the way
> to resolve the SOM duality is to posit reality as totally subjective.
That's pure Idealism, a philosophy that goes back at least to Berkeley.
> > > Again, I find it necessary to express my
> > > disappointment in your having been so easily suckered into New Age
> > > scientism.
> > I'm baffled as to how you got the idea that I'm a Hippie. Perhaps you'll
> > explain.
>
> I didn't call you a Hippie, Platt, although, like the twinkling "little
> star", I'm beginning to wonder what you are. ;-)
I associate Hippies with New Agers which I'm not. Anyway, it's becoming
increasingly evident that you have hitched your star to Idealism, a point
of view easily rejected by noting the cardinals in my back yard depend on
a great many things for their existence, but somebody's looking at them is
not one of those things.
Regards,
Platt
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 : Sun Jan 09 2005 - 13:27:01 GMT