From: hampday@earthlink.net
Date: Thu Jun 09 2005 - 02:27:26 BST
Platt --
First off, I don't believe we've defined the MoQ's Primary Reality, a topic
I initiated with a "reality check" back in April in the wake of the 'Hume,
Paley and Intelligent Design' controversy. The discussion fell into a kind
of funk that didn't go anywhere but just seemed to float between
subjectivism and 'immaterialism' (to use Scott's term). The ephemeral
nature of the comments I received have convinced me that the MoQ has no
reality and that Pirsig's much-tauted "primary empirical reality" was merely
a metaphor to prop up his Quality concept.
To me, statements like "Value exists because you cannot refute the belief
without asserting a value" and "Some things are better than others" are not
philosophical propositions but platitudes designed to evade logical
analysis. Yet, it is just such quotations that seem to keep the MoQ alive
(dare I add, as a cult movement?)
You're saying now that SOM, transcendent reality, and the MoQ are all
"allowed as high quality assumptions". Unfortunately, that's the kind of
spongy answer I've come to expect from this group. You all seem resigned to
the futility of metaphysics. Paul even denied that propositions could be
either true or false, suggesting that reality is only a symbolic notion
constructed linguistically from ideas supported by an authority-approved
consensus. Needless to say, I'm disappointed that no one is confident
enough of his beliefs to take a stand. Only socio-political events seem
capable of inspiring that kind of passion.
> But, there is no one right answer to the question, "What is real?" any
> more than there is only one right way to think. We argue as if right and
> wrong answers exist only because logic so demands. And because it's fun.
But there IS a right answer to the question, Platt; we just don't have the
capability to verify it. I get the distinct impression from this group
that, since absolute truth is denied us, there is no primary reality, so we
might as well play the game of Pirsig Says "because it's fun".
My idea of a "workable" philosophy is a rationale for the human experience
with sufficient insight and meaning to engender the personal conviction of
the truth-seeker. However, we can't build a philosophical foundation on a
reality that we don't believe exists. That's called Nihilism, and from what
I've seen so far here, it pretty much describes the MoQ package.
Anyway, thanks for the reply, Platt.
Regards,
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 : Thu Jun 09 2005 - 02:28:05 BST