From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Mon Aug 18 2003 - 00:38:14 BST
Paul and all:
Paul asked:
Except that, having agreed that "truths are merely provisional tools",
you ask - is evolution "true"? What am I missing?
dmb says:
No. I'm not exactly asking if evolution is true or not. I'm asking how we
can reconcile two seemingly contrary and mutually exclusive claims. One
claim is that cosmological evolution is among the highest quality
intellectual explanations. The other claims that such explanations are
actually incorrect. That's it. That's all there is to it. Pirsig says A is
great, but is also a false presumption made by materialist. To make matters
worse, the static levels of the MOQ are not viable without this mistaken
presumption.
Pirsig in a letter to Anthony McWatt:
And in this highest quality intellectual pattern, external objects appear
historically before intellectual patterns... But this highest quality
intellectual pattern itself comes before the external world, not after, as
is commonly presumed by the materialist."
Pirsig in Lila's Child:
"It is important for an understanding of the MOQ to see that although
'common sense' dictates that inorganic nature came first, actually 'common
sense' which is A SET OF IDEAS, has to come first.
In the same letter Pirsig also says:
"If cosmological evolution does not exist then the ordering of the four
static levels in the MOQ would cease to be a viable basis for a moral
framework."
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 Aug 18 2003 - 00:39:22 BST