Re: MD Consciousness/MOQ, definition of

From: Case (Case@iSpots.com)
Date: Sun Sep 11 2005 - 23:34:22 BST

  • Next message: Wim Nusselder: "Re: MD Katrina - Thousands Dead ?"

    [Scott wrote]
    > It seems to me that Pirsig's discussion of evolution in Lila, ch. 11, is
    > at
    > odds with what you are saying. For Pirsig, evolution requires something
    > that
    > an old-style materialist (who thinks in terms of chance and mechanisms)
    > would call supernatural, namely DQ. Pirsig says that there is no conflict
    > between the MOQ and Darwinism, as long as "survival of the fittest" is
    > understood as "survival of the more valuable". And he says that there is
    > no
    > conflict with teleological versions of evolution. To put it another way, I
    > think that Dawkins would reject the MOQ's view of evolution as being
    > teleological.

    [Case wrote]
    Thanks Scott! After rereading Chapter 11 I see that you are correct. Pirsig
    does attempt to reconcile these two points of view. I think nearly
    everything he says is this chapter is off base and am working on a much
    longer response. But thanks for pointing this out! It stimulated a great
    deal of reanalysis on my part.

    [Case begs pardon of Ham]
    While I think I disagree with you on a profound level I do confess to being
    a bit sarcastic. But after listening to Lee Stroble and Hank Hanegraaff talk
    about it for a week on the Bible Answerman radiio show, I have little
    patience with the Watchermaker arguement. It just leads to infinite regress,
    adds nothing to our understanding and passes for reasoned discourse but only
    with the right theme music.

    I thought I actually first read what follows in a book by Bertrand Russell
    but this was all I could find of it on the internet. It sums up my thoughts
    on the Watchermaker pretty well:

    "A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a
    public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the
    sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the centre of a vast collection
    of stars called our galaxy.

    At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at
    the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish.
    The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant
    tortoise."

    The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is
    the tortoise standing on?"

    "You're very clever, young man, very clever,"
    said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down."

    I could tolerate the notion of intelligent design as a harmless fantasy, if
    people would stop trying to require teaching it as science in our schools.

    I am sorry I really mean no sarcasm here but imagining myself stepping
    outside of space and time and looking at the cosmos from a divine
    perspective has not enhanced my understanding. Having thought this problem
    through for myself a couple of times now, I still conclude that the notion
    of purpose and design in nature conceals more of the mystery than it
    reveals.

    Case

    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 : Mon Sep 12 2005 - 00:48:26 BST