[Ham]
> For example, it seems to me that Pirsig has taken
> morality out of the human
> domain and applied it to the universe at large.
> Well, if the universe is
> moral, so is nature and nature's man.
Way back when I first started I said to you that
human beings are in the universe, and it is very, very
easy to understand the well-discussed concept in the
moq that human beings are a part of nature. This has
been much of the meat of the moq, but you are
convinced that human beings are separate from the
universe and project your idea onto the moq.
[Ham]
> Why, then, should anyone strive for
> morality? What purpose does life serve if nature is
> innately moral?
How moral is a piece of dirt? Moral enough, but
when compared with the other levels dirt is moral
enough to not be destroyed by the higher levels, but
the higher levels are more moral. But you project
human concepts upon the universe, so, a concept such
as value or moral only has human qualities to your
understanding. But the world includes humans and
human qualities, but moral and value are not
restricted to human qualities, so, what good is a
piece of dirt?
[Ham]
> Pirsig suggests that we try to "discover" that
principle on
> the premise that "some
> things are better than others". That would make our
> role in existence
> discovering its Quality or Goodness rather than
> actualizing it through our
> decisions and behavior.
Oh how quickly you forget the intellectual
level, but that's your job. You are to not understand
the moq, and say stuff about the moq that is not
thought through very well. I'm sure I didn't think
through on your essence very well, but I don't like
your thesis that much and you don't like the moq that
much so we can not put our full thought into our
respective dislikes.
[Ham]
> For me,
And what you say metaphysics is, is the holy
bible on metaphysics, correct? I don't know how many
times I've seen you play somebody off as not 'being
philosophical'.
[Ham]
> metaphysics is the theory of reality beyond
> experiential knowledge. Such
> theory can only be hypothetical, of course, so I can
> offer no "empirical
> proof" for my metaphysical concepts.
Some people want to be able to acknowledge this
world, the wind blowing, the laughter of children,
etc... You like to offer a reality that is has ones
'heads in the clouds'. I'm not being degrading. I'm
trying to anaologize your position and how some have
turned away from this line of thinking. Some people
have found the acceptance of being a part of nature as
very real, as real as a rock and a lady's smile.
[Ham]
> All knowledge comes from experience, but if you base
> your reality perspective entirely on knowledge, you
> will gain more from Science than Philosophy.
Ah, but the moq discusses not only three other
levels that differ from the intellectual level, but
also a dynamic quality about the world that is
unknown. Hmmm, these simple understandings of the
moq, that Ham continues to state the moq doesn't
provide -?-
[Ham]
> The latter draws on logic,
> intuition, and reason.
> Instead of exploring "new frontiers" of knowledge,
> which is as fallible as
> experience, Philosophy (especially metaphysics)
> attempts to identify the
> fundamental nature of reality and apply reasoned
> hypotheses to account for
> what we experience.
"for what we experience", hmmm...
[Ham]
> You say that "by demanding that it include a primary
> source and purpose, I
> think you are promoting
> unnecessary restrictions." I don't see that at
> all. For me, failing to
> consider primacy and purpose imposes an unnecessary
> restriction on
> understanding. It also reveals a prejudicial
> attitude toward spirituality
> and supra-natural or transcendental beliefs.
> (Another reason for my use of
> the offensive term.)
Dynamic quality has been accepted by an unknown
number of people as where the spiritual, mystic sense
of the moq steps in. Even Pirsig mentions this. I
don't know about transcendental admittedly.
[Ham]
> These are valid questions, Marsha, and they
> demonstrate that you are
> thinking...
I wonder what she or others are doing when not
discussing essence thesis? Not thinking I guess.
just on the side-lines commenting,
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news,
photos & more.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
