From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Tue Nov 04 2003 - 19:48:50 GMT
JM:I am still promoting the word
"Expectation" as a more enlightening synonym for Quality and Morality and
Reality that drives home the ontological process of Morality.
Nice to have someone like my post.
I am interested in the use of expectation.
Seems clear to me that DQ's activity
is about reducing the multi-possible
into the actual. Like choice and reason
are possible only by being aware of the future/possible
i.e. expectation. Expectation seems to be key
to evolution, without some kind of choice the cosmos
seems to be impossible (if you reject initial design)
as it is. Also in quantum theory the double slit
experiment of Young, can be interpreted as a single
electron being influenced by the presence of its
possibilities, so that a interference pattern is formed.
Is quantum probability what enables there to be a future?
Without an open future there would be no DQ.
regards
David M
----- Original Message -----
From: "johnny moral" < >
To: < >
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 8:22 PM
Subject: Re: MD Two theories of truth
> hi folks,
>
> >DMB (I think says):Rorty's truth
> > > is such a flimsy and arbitrary kind of truth, but Pirsig insists there
> >is
> > > something that holds it all together, just as there is something that
> >holds
> > > the glass together and lets you drink.
>
> johnny: I don't see how intersubjective agreement could be called
> arbitrary. It is what it has to be. I think dmb imagines people having a
> meeting or something, and reaching some hasty compromise about what is
true.
> What happens is that history dictates what people believe, our shared
> mythos, morality, creates intersubjective agreement, and from that
> intersubjective agreement, more history and mythos and morality are
created
> into the future. I think we should think of intersubjective agreement and
> quality as synonyms, though perhaps each brings to mind a different part
of
> the same cycle.
>
> >Pirsig's answer says Anthony is:
> >The answer provided by Pirsig is that the atoms of the glass can be said,
> >metaphysically, to value sticking together.
>
> johnny: I think Morality values the glass to continue to be a glass, and
if
> we want to look at it with a microscope, Morality will value us finding
> atoms there, behaving morally, as expected.
>
> >Yes, value is the key. DQ is free, the only cause of SQ is DQ valuing its
> >existence, it allows it to repeat.
>
> Johnny: I agree with this definition of DQ completely. I put it this way
> though, to most everyone's chagrin: value is expectation being realized, a
> pattern is an expectation, a moral. I am still promoting the word
> "Expectation" as a more enlightening synonym for Quality and Morality and
> Reality that drives home the ontological process of Morality. The only
> reason patterns contnue (aka SQ) is because value comes from them being
> continued, and Love is the love of this value, the energy or force that
> realizes expectation so as to reap the value. Perhaps this value then in
> turn becomes the energy for Love to continue eternally.
>
> >Rorty's theory of truth is closely linked, what is true for us will
depend
> >on what we value.
> >Don't see why a MOQer would have a problem with this.
> >Value holds everything together it seems, not so flimsy.
> >Truth depends on language and value. Rorty and Pirsig agree.
>
> johnny: me too! :)
>
> >What we value has all kinds of sources see Charles Taylor's
> >Sources of the Self. The status of truth has to be similar
> >to the status of Newton's laws of physics as discussed in ZMM.
> >The 'truth' concept is a cultural phenomenon, and subject to
> >the quality of cultural phenomenon as Rorty discusses. Can't
> >see why a Pirsig reader would lose any sleep over what Rorty says.
> >When people here start to complain about Rorty they are always talking
> >about stuff that Rorty does not write about or arguing with a position
> >he does not take.
> >
> >regards
> >David M
>
> Right. I don't think Rorty is wrong about anything, I just think it
> obfuscates because it seems to put the focus too far down the line and
> doesn't highlight the dependence on history and morality. When he says
> truth is a cultural phenomen, it seems to denigrate truth, culture, and
> phenomenons all at the same time, when what is called for is great respect
> of these things. It is right that morality and truth are maleable, but it
> is morality and truth that hold themselves together even as they change.
> Rorty seems to be saying that it is US that do that, and that makes people
> upset. The respect should be given to Morality, not us, as we are just
one
> of Morality's creations.
>
> Johnny Moral
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Enjoy MSN 8 patented spam control and more with MSN 8 Dial-up Internet
> Service. Try it FREE for one month!
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
>
>
>
> 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 : Tue Nov 04 2003 - 21:35:10 GMT