From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sun Nov 16 2003 - 16:34:12 GMT
Scott, Matt
> Scott said:
> Thus you miss the point when you give examples that are true by
> correspondence. Truth by correspondence only works when the example
> consists of sense-perceptible particulars, as is the case in your
> examples. But as soon as generalities are involved, truth by
> correspondence doesn't work.
>
> Matt:
> I want to thank Scott for this. Many times I get overzealous in my
> eschewment of "correspondence". Scott's right when he says "truth by
> correspondence only works when the example consists of sense-perceptible
> particulars". What the pragmatist balks at is analogizing all truth to
> sense perception. We don't know what it means for Truth to be an object
> the same as a tiger; we think the analogy very bad.
Maybe Scott and Matt balk at "analogizing" (now there's a word for you)
all truth to sense perception. But Pirsig has no such hesitation:
"The Metaphysics of Quality subscribes to what is call empiricism. It
claims that all legitimate human knowledge arises from the senses or by
thinking about what the senses provide." (Lila, chp 8)
It's should be clear to all by now that Scott and Matt do not agree
with one of the key principles of the MOQ.
Speaking for myself, I'm not willing to act daily and consistently on
the belief that knowledge comes from sources other than sense
perception. I'm especially not willing to act on the belief that
knowledge must come from some group or other, like from a bunch of ivy-
towered postmodernists who claim "... there is nothing to objectivity
except intersubjectivity."
Platt
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 - 16:32:36 GMT