Platt:
I agree with Pirsig that what you and I perceive as reality is Quality
influenced by our natural senses and individual history. Your belief in
a
reality "more moral than human perception of it" is nevertheless YOUR
belief based on your individual perceptions of Quality. So I think we're
in
basic agreement about the foundation of reality. But, I could be wrong.
Ron:
You are right that we agree
None the less I contend that what you call MY belief is also shared by
Pirsig.
Platt:
Here is where I lose you. Many values are static. Thus we have the
four moral levels that makes it more moral for a doctor to kill a germ
than
a germ to kill a doctor.
Ron:
What does "more moral" mean? If:
"morality equals reality" ?
Ron quotes Platt again:
> > Quality equals reality. Quality equals morality. Ergo, reality
> > equals morality.
Ron prev:
> What defines superiority differs by every act of value from atoms to
> thoughts.
Platt:
Yes, but as above, we see a static pattern of values -- from atoms to
thoughts with thoughts being morally superior to atoms.
Ron:
If Morality equals reality, by saying
Something is more moral you are in effect stating
That it is more real. Or did I misquote you?
" reality > > equals morality."
Ron quotes Platt:
" I don't see how you can define anything without reference to something
else."
Ron:
It seems quite clear you have no way of defining what morality is Less
running it in circular logic per your opinion of it. This is my point.
This goes for myself as well.
So what the heck does Pirsig mean when he says doctors are more moral
Than germs? Does he mean that doctors are more real to us than germs?
More valuable to us than germs? It's interesting when you really look at
it
And follow the logic.
Thanks Platt
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/
