From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Sat Apr 09 2005 - 01:26:43 BST
Hi Scott, how ya been?
On 8 Apr 2005 at 14:21, Scott Roberts wrote:
Scott:
Below is a recent post of mine that challenges that claim of the MOQ
to be empirical. Thus far there has been no reply.
- Scott
[3/22/2005]
DMB said:
But the MOQ is empirical from head to toe. It asserts nothing without
evidence.
Scott asked dmb:
What is the empirical evidence that there is value at the inorganic
level? (I've been asking for this for several months, from you, Paul,
and Ant, and have yet to receive an answer. If the answer is that
subatomic elements "prefer" some states over others, I would ask how
do you know that that is "preferment" and not, say, chance?)
msh says:
I think your question is based on a mistaken premise, that the MOQ is
either right or wrong, not just more or less useful in relation to
other systems. Remember, to say the MOQ is right and SOM is wrong
lis like saying Cartesian coordinates are right and polar coordinates
are wrong, that Euclid was wrong and Riemann was right. Metaphysical
systems make assumptions about the world, and we make those
assumptions in order to make use of the systems.
When two H atoms are joined by O, we can say they bond, prefer one
another's company, or are simply in love. It doesn't matter what we
say, we still end up with a water molecule, the empirical evidence is
the same. Pirsig says "prefers" and that's fine with me, because I
find the MOQ more useful than SOM.
Scott to DMB:
Since the MOQ claims to be based solely on experience, I am asking
what experience leads to the choice of the preference interpretation?
msh says:
The experience of being able to field a better description of
reality.
Scott riddled DMB:
What is the empirical evidence that, all else being equal, the more
dynamic is better than the less dynamic? ... What is the evidence
to reply to a radical conservative who thinks that change is not a
good thing?
msh says:
Change is not always a good thing. Sometimes the radical
conservative is right, but usually for the wrong reasons. I'd
evaluate the proposed change, using the MOQ's moral hierarchy, and go
from there.
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 "The shadows that a swinging lamp will throw, We come from nowhere and to nothing go." 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 Apr 09 2005 - 01:58:55 BST