Re: MD matt said scott said

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Tue Nov 18 2003 - 21:10:30 GMT

  • Next message: Nathan Pila: "MD It sounds a bit like memes"

    Scott,

    > > > Sense-perceptible particulars are the objects and events we see,
    > > > hear, touch, smell, and taste. By "see" (to refer to your later
    > > > post) I mean physical sight, not insight or understanding.
    > >
    > > The MOQ adds "value" to the physical senses [Scott] lists. Value is
    > > our sixth sense.
    >
    > Does he ever actually call it a sense? All I recall is that he says it
    > is "verifiable", a source of knowledge.

    From Pirsig's SODV paper:

    "In the third box are the biological patterns: senses of touch, sight
    hearing, smell and taste. The Metaphysics of Quality follows the
    empirical tradition here in saying that the senses are the starting
    point of reality, but -- all importantly -- it includes a sense of
    value. Values are phenomena. To ignore them is to misread the world."

    > In any case, one cannot
    > demonstrate truth of value judgments by correspondence. That is, if I
    > say X is better than Y, and you say Y is better than X, then there is
    > nothing further that either of us can physically point to to determine
    > who is right (we may be able to make non-sense-perceptible
    > justifications, but those are not done through correspondence).
     
    Agree. I see our sense of value as a catalyst for coming up with
    premises which is a response to DQ ("Hey, I think I have a great
    idea."), to be verified by the scientific demands of logical
    consistency and correspondence to observation, i.e., experience.

    Scott in a previous post:
    If you're going to insist that "being rational" is all and only
    Aristotelian logic, then there isn't much more to say. One cannot come
    up
    with the idea that Quality is prior to subject and object through
    Aristotelian logic. That act is one of creating a hypothesis, while
    Aristotelian logic only determines what one can deduce from a set of
    assumptions. Therefore, according to you, Pirsig is irrational.

    Platt
    Agree that logic cannot create a hypothesis. But once you come up with
    a hypothesis, an assumption or a premise (I suggest from a response to
    DQ), then Aristotelian logic applies to make deductions which can then
    be verified by the physical senses. This is how high quality
    intellectual patterns are created other than those created by pure
    mathematics. I don't how the "logic of contradictory identity" is of
    any help in this process.

    Pirsig with a leap of imagination in response to DQ came up with
    hypothesis that Quality is reality. Then he set about creating a
    metaphysics using Aristotelian logic and correspondence to experience
    in order to verify the intellectual quality of his hypothesis.

    My sense of value tells me the intellectual quality of the MOQ is very
    high indeed. Your sense of value says otherwise.

    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 : Tue Nov 18 2003 - 21:38:49 GMT