Re: MD Access to Quality

From: ian glendinning (psybertron@gmail.com)
Date: Wed May 18 2005 - 18:28:01 BST

  • Next message: Mark Steven Heyman: "Re: MD Access to Quality"

    Michael you said (of Platt)
    To put it mildly, this is a gross distortion.

    I say I agree with you.
    Welcome to "Plattitudes"

    I can only manage smart-ass one-liners in response these days.
    More power to your elbow.

    Ian

    On 5/19/05, Michael Hamilton <thethemichael@gmail.com> wrote:
    > Hi Platt
    >
    > I can't let this one go:
    >
    > Pirsig takes a dim view of James' pragmatism in
    > Lila, pointing out that Nazis were pragmatic. (For similar reasons I
    > object to postmodernists making pragmatism an object of worship.)
    >
    > To put it mildly, this is a gross distortion. Pirsig shows total agreement
    > with James' axiom "Truth is a species of good", and goes on to say how the
    > MOQ supports James' pragmatism and RESCUES him from the Nazi criticism,
    > which runs "if the Nazis had won WW2, their beliefs (about race etc) were
    > pragmatically successful and therefore true". MOQ pragmatism, which Pirsig
    > claims is what James intended but could not codify, does not validate truth
    > claims based on social pragmatic success (what others allow you to "get away
    > with"), but on intellectual pragmatic success (in James' words, that which
    > "proves itself to be good in the way of belief"). The ambiguity of "good" is
    > what got James into problems. The MOQ says that the good to which truth is
    > subordinate is intellectual and Dynamic usefulness, not social usefulness.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Mike
    >
    > On 5/18/05, Platt Holden <pholden@sc.rr.com> wrote:
    > > Hi Erin,
    > >
    > > > Ok but I still can't see how it can be considered a pragamtic approach.
    > You
    > > > said to ham in one post that assumptions are not empirical. With this
    > > > expansion of the definition to include everything and its mother I don't
    > > > see why assumptions are not considered emprical or pragmatic. Because
    > that
    > > > is getting into as you say "who experiences what"
    > >
    > > Perhaps you can explain to me why you seem to consider a "pragmatic
    > > approach" to be desirable. Pirsig takes a dim view of James' pragmatism in
    > > Lila, pointing out that Nazis were pragmatic. (For similar reasons I
    > > object to postmodernists making pragmatism an object of worship.)
    > >
    > > The problem I see with a "pragmatic" approach is that it begs the
    > > questions, "Useful in what ways to whom?" followed by a judgment, "Is
    > > that good?" (Actually the judgment comes prior to determining the action
    > > and its supposed beneficiaries.)
    > >
    > > For example, welfare programs that dole out other people's money were
    > > hailed as a pragmatic way to "help" the poor, but the results have turned
    > > out to be anything but helpful, creating a permanent dependent class. The
    > > successful trial and error experimental methods of science don't transfer
    > > well up to the level of human societies.
    > >
    > > "Pragmatic" social engineering usually ends up making more of mess of
    > > things than the mess it intended to clean up, not to mention the loss of
    > > individual liberty such engineering demands, a loss some people consider
    > > OK so long as their idea of a "greater good" is served -- a road that
    > > leads to tyranny.
    > >
    > > As to your question about assumptions, they are indeed empirical if you
    > > buy the MOQ view that ideas are experience like everything else. By
    > > contrast, in the S/O worldview the same assumptions are not empirical
    > > because they are not perceptible to the physical senses. It was in this
    > > latter SOM, scientific context that I said "assumptions are nonempirical."
    > >
    > > 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
    > >
    > >
    >
    >

    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 May 18 2005 - 19:04:58 BST