From: hampday@earthlink.net
Date: Tue Jan 11 2005 - 17:46:42 GMT
Hi Horse --
> On 11 Jan 2005 at 3:44, hampday@earthlink.net wrote:
>
> > I believe there is some truth in Pirsig's assertion that what lacks
> > Value to man does not exist.
Horse comments:
> Pirsig said "... a thing that has no value does not exist.". There's no
reference to 'man' in
> the quote or the rest of the passage.
I don't have the exact quotation or its context handy, but would be
surprised if "man" was not implied in Pirsig's statement. Value is a
meaningless term without the sensibility to realize it. Does Value not
infer an "evaluator"? For example, what possible value (or Quality) could
the unverse be said to have in itself with without an observer? To me, this
is the equivalent of saying that something existed at a specific point in
time before there was anyone to measure it. The passing of time is a
rational construct of man's finite perspective. Likewise, the appreciation
of Value is unque to the human mind.
Unless the MOQ epistemology includes an ontology whereby Quality is
postulated as "valuable to itself", as in the notion of a "sensible
universe", I fail to see how Value in isolation can be a valid concept. I'm
hoping to find an answer to this enigma in Anthony's PhD thesis which I
downloaded yesterday. Thus far, however, nothing that has been posted in
this forum to date encourages me that there is a solution.
Anyway, thanks for your clarification.
Ham
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 : Tue Jan 11 2005 - 19:44:34 GMT