From: Sam Norton (elizaphanian@kohath.wanadoo.co.uk)
Date: Sun Aug 21 2005 - 09:07:14 BST
Hi DMB, (or Paul, or Ant, or anyone)
I'm genuinely interested in having my lack of understanding corrected. I've
spent ages bashing my head against it, with various fruitful and
non-fruitful results. So I'm in a state of beginner's mind. Paul assures me
that Pirsig's explanation of 'experience' is not SOM (and as I think he is
generally very sound, I give his views a lot of respect). So how about you
let go of the karma dumping, and try to actually answer my concern?
What is the word 'experience' doing in the MoQ?
As I say, I know what it means in the standard Cartesian/Lockean/empirical
tradition - which is pretty much how James uses it - but Pirsig denies the
SOM, as demonstrated in the quotations you put in.
I genuinely do not understand what he means. If you understand it, please
could you explain it to me. If you don't or can't explain it, I'll take that
as confirmation that you don't understand it either.
Or anyone - Paul, Ant, whomsoever. I can't be the only person who finds this
difficult.
Sam
"Wittgenstein's exasperation with James is a response not so much to his
practicing science, or claiming to be practicing science when he is doing
something else, but, more fundamentally, to James' empiricism, his belief
that _experience_ is a sufficient fundamental category." (Russell Goodman,
"Wittgenstein and William James")
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 Aug 21 2005 - 10:01:33 BST