DMB
On 10 Jan. you returned full of holy wrath.
Bo said:
> > ..the mind/matter problem isn't solved but merely moved to the
> > biological/social gap. We see that he regards biological patterns
> > "exist in the material world".
> dmb says:
> If the social level evolved out of the biological level then there is
> no gap.
Of course there is no gap that's the very point, but Pirsig
introduces SOM's unbridgeable gap inside the MOQ gap by
saying things like this (Lila's Child")
In the MOQ, all organisms are objective. they exist in the
material world. all societies are subjective. they exist in
the mental world".
Had he said "from SOM seen organisms exist in its material
world and societies in its mental world" .. it may have passed
even though this falters, I guess even you will protest that
societies only exists in out minds. But Pirsig clearly says that
there is a material and a mental world and the unavoidable "gap"
between them inside the MOQ.
DMB ctd:
> By analogy, there is no "gap" between a child and an adult but
> rather continuous growth by which one grows into the other. As Pirsig
> says, they exist in a matter-of-fact evolutionary relationship. SOM
> creates the mind-body problem by saying that truth consists in a
> pre-existing subjective mind correctly corresponding to or mirroring a
> pre-existing objective reality.
No serious disagreement, but from inside SOM it doesn't look like
(you say) that truth consists in a prexisting subjective mind..etc. It
looks like an objective reality that we - humankind - may discover
the workings of. What you propose is far into the MOQ's showing
SOM's metaphysical problems.
DMB ctd:
> Contemporary scientific materialism tries to solve this problem by
> saying that brains and minds are identical but the MOQ (As well as
> nearly all postmodern philosophers) point out that language so
> thoroughly shapes our intellectual concepts that objectivity is an
> impossible fiction. In that sense, most of today's scientists are
> operating with assumptions that philosophical thinkers no longer take
> seriously, except as a problem to be overcome.
Language in itself does not shape anything - it's the medium we
communicate by - but "language" in your presentation is a proxy
for "society" and it's the parent of intellect, that we all know. And
when intellect-steeped (somists) scientists start to THINK they
see all these problems with the mind/matter reality. It mostly
results in New Physics mysticism (nonsense IMO). But the MOQ
is not mysticism. It offers a new metaphysical platform where the
old SOM is relegated the place of its own highest static level, but
subordinate to the DQ/SQ reality - ought to at least.
> Again, I think you don't understand the problem, let alone the
> solution. You're probably starting to hate me by now, but I just can't
> let it go any longer. I think your SOL is sheer nonsense and that you
> are only producing confusion here with it.
No problem, you are a nice fellow and it shows even when you
are angry.
Sincerely
Bo
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/
