RE: MD Two theories of truth

From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun Nov 16 2003 - 02:38:37 GMT

  • Next message: Nathan Pila: "MD what is life?"

    Matt, Paul and all:

    dmb begins with a reminder:
    When it comes to the MOQ, I think Paul is a rock star and I'd only add to
    what he's saying.

    Paul said:
    Therefore, as Quality *creates* static patterns (including
    intersubjective agreement), I don't think they are interchangeable. In
    addition, to borrow some words from Pirsig - when an American Indian
    goes into isolation and fasts in order to achieve a vision, the vision
    he seeks is not one of intersubjective agreement.

    Matt replied:
    I think you are making the same mistake Platt makes by thinking that by
    'intersubjective agreement' I mean that one has to follow what the group
    thinks. This isn't true. 'Intersubjective agreement' represents the
    continuum from idiosyncratic beliefs to common sense. ...
    There are places for both and not all things need to become common
    sense. However, I do think all things start as idiosyncratic beliefs
    just in the way as the Native American originates the vision.

    dmb says:
    I don't share Platt's view of intersubjectivity as "groupthink" or whatever.
    I think Matt was quite right to point out that forced conformity brought
    about by the coercive tactics of political tyrannts is another thing
    entirely. And I'd also agree that there are relatively small and obscure
    intersubjective spaces, those more or less idiosyncratic beleifs, and that
    these count as agreement too. But I think Matt has missed Paul's point in
    two important ways, the first one being very simple. The truth discovered in
    a vision quest is just not related to any of this. Its a whole different
    beast. No agreement is required and its meaning to the quester is, in some
    sense, beyond dispute. It hardly has anything to do with sanity, common
    sense, intersubjective agreement or anything like that. And I'd add that to
    say that its "personal" isn't exactly untrue, but seems to undercut its
    importance. Paul also get at the second mistake....

    Paul explained:
    The statement about Native American vision quests was intended to refute
    the claim that mystic reality (Dynamic Quality) is equivalent to
    intersubjective agreement, not to say something about a discussion of
    mystic reality.

    dmb says:
    Just as I argued earlier today, Matt has confused sq and DQ again. Not only
    did Pirsig have a vision quest of his own, as depicted in the opening
    chapters of Lila, but he also concludes the book with its implications.
    Nearly everything in between is an elaborate explanation of insights gained
    in that teepee. This is why I keep insisting that Matt's reading of the MOQ
    tears the heart and soul out of the thing. Its nearly impossible to ignore,
    and yet Matt seems quite happy to do so. Thus my frustration. If I had a
    couple hits of LSD, I'd send it to him - or slip it into his beer. Further,
    its is this experience that makes Pirsig so much closer to William Blake's
    or the Buddha's, than to anything like Rorty's view. I'm not saying this
    very well, but its just so obvious to me that mysticism and neo-pragmatism
    are lightyears away from each other. Pirsig is, among other things, trying
    to bridge the gap between East and West, science and religion, objects and
    values. Rorty is only pushing common sense. Yawn!

    Paul said:
    Pirsig's redescription of morality in evolutionary terms provides an
    explanation for the presence of immorality and good and evil. ...Low
    Quality-as-such for one level of patterns is high Quality-as-such
    for another, a feeling that would be verified as real by any adulterer

    Matt replied:
    Sure it does, but I'm not looking for an explanation as to its presence.
    I wondering why we should respect low Quality-as-such.

    dmb says:
    Like Paul says, sex with a wide variety of partners is very high quality as
    far as the organism is concerned, and it only becomes low by comparison to
    social values such as marriage vows. Or to put it another way, its all good,
    but that doesn't keep us from seeing that some things are better than
    others. They say Einstein was a lousy father and husband, but one has to
    wonder what we'd have missed if he devoted himself to family instead of
    physics, you know?

    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 Nov 16 2003 - 02:41:23 GMT