From: Steve & Oxsana Marquis (marquis@nccn.net)
Date: Sun Apr 10 2005 - 15:33:35 BST
Sam writes:
_______________________
Socrates wants definitions as answers, not examples of use. (eg 'what is
justice' - he's not happy with being shown the practices where the word
justice has its employment, he wants a universally valid *dialectical*
definition). That's why Socrates is one of the bad guys (at least for the
Narrator in ZMM, if not for the Phaedrus of Lila).
_______________________
Sam, definition is fine if we allow for multiple paradigms to be equally
valid. Euclid's geometry is probably the most useful geometrical paradigm
we have. Where this model applies we can certainly use axioms / definitions
to build up useful theorems in quite a formal way. And, as we know, for
other frames of reference we need other geometries.
Of course Plato is assuming one universal 'truth', his theory of Forms. And
he's utilizing the dialectic to get there. But the dialectic can just as
well be used within the confines of any particular frame of reference where
certain types of logic apply. It cannot be used for or against DQ, for
example, it just doesn't apply.
If those who consider the scientific method so all encompassing would just
consider geometry for a bit maybe they would loosen up. The scientific
method addresses a certain frame of reference and it does have limitations.
My proposal is that Euclidian geometry, the scientific method, and the
dialectic are all very useful most of the time. It is the pragmatic test
that determines which frame of reference we are in and therefore which
'tools' will work. The idea is to have many tools in one's toolbox.
Throwing out dialectic entirely is a little hasty and not well-considered
IMO.
Definition is cleaner than example; it has sharp boundaries. For that
reason it is a higher quality intellectual tool, we just need to recognize
its limitations.
Sam:
____________________
Have you read my essay on the website entitled 'the eudaimonic MoQ'? I think
you might find it interesting.
____________________
I did and I do. I will need some time to look at it carefully. My primary
interest is ancient Greek ethics (way of life would be better since
eudaimonia applies not to just the modern ethical sphere, but one's entire
life). I am self-taught, but I've been looking at this for a while. If you
don't have it already I recommend 'Morality of Happiness' by Julia Annas.
Separating Socrates from Plato is an almost impossible task. But there is a
separation. The Hellenistic schools all considered themselves heirs of the
Socratic, not Platonic, tradition. When I refer to 'Socratic inquiry' I
mean an open-ended honest search for the Good. In this sense Pirsig is of
the same tradition. I use as evidence the dialogues that do not conclude
with an answer to the central question of the dialogue. If we expand the
method being demonstrated from one assumed all-encompassing paradigm to all
paradigms that apply (all of which have limitations) then we've salvaged a
useful tool while recognizing its limitations and maintained that honest
spirit that desires to know and experience that's crucial to living the good
life. I don't know who coined it but the phase 'creative discontent' comes
to mind.
Pirsig considered Quality to be synonymous with Aretê, or 'excellence',
albeit the Sophist version. Genuine Sophistry needs a look, wouldn't you
say? I am sure there were those who claimed to be Sophists who tended to
lead their followers to lower Quality just like Plato claims for all of
them. Yet Plato is stuck without the Dynamic and with just one static frame
of reference. Some separation work needs to be done here as well (between
genuine Sophistry and Plato's negative view of Sophistry).
Live well,
Steve
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 Apr 10 2005 - 15:38:31 BST