for an idea of what a MOQ philosophy of science might look like try: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Knowledge-Wisdom-Revolution-Science-Humanities/dp/0955224004/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1204838765&sr=1-1
DM ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jorge Goldfarb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 8:58 PM Subject: [MD] Science and the MOQ Chris writes: ... but I'd like to start with criticising the last part of the post. The MOQ can't "leave sciense out" because it is a metaphysics, and thus e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g has to be incorporated in it. If something is left out, it doesn't work. But I think we can all quite easily agree on this. Jorge: Well, I, for one, don't easily agree on that. My approach, as an outsider, to the relation between Science and the MOQ is basically of common sense or garden-pragmatism. As I said in my last Post: " .why not leave Science alone for the time being? Perhaps later on, when the MOQ is more firmly established as a Metaphysics, the time would arrive to change Science's numerous shortcomings" Emphasis on "for the time being".until "the MOQ is more firmly established as a Metaphysics".In the meantime, plenty to do instead of clallenging Science. I get the impression (just an impression) from frequent derogatory comments on Science in this Forum (and also from selected quotes of Pirsig's books) that Science is looked as a sheep gone stray that needs to be steered back to the flock by the MOQ. You yourself sums it up as: " Science doesn't really have direction or meaning, to sum up large parts of ZMM in one sentence" Poor Science.adrift, with no direction or meaning. What if I were to say that Science in the last century has led humanity along an incredible journey of discovery? A journey towards a far better understanding of the world around us? Wouldn't you call that "direction"? How have other fields of creativity fared in that same peiod? As to "meaning".I really don't know what is the meaning of Science, but neither what is the "meaning" of Art, Philosophy or Religion. I presume that each of them, in its own particular way, helps human beings in finding meanings from their experienced world. But that was just "muddling through", as you say. Coming back to my former point: the relation between Science and the MOQ, if viewed as a contest or conflict, appears like a David and Goliath one. David challenged Goliath he was pretty sure that God was on his side, a belief I gather the MOQ does not have. Ever since I read Z&AMM I've been intrigued about why Pirsig picked upon Science as a foremost example of what's wrong with our culture. Not that Science is free of flaws and shortcomings, most scientists are well aware of them. But, why not other areas where we are faring much worse? Man-to-man relations and society's ills to quote just two of the most prominent ones. __________________________________________________________ Sent from Yahoo! Mail. The World's Favourite Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html 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/ 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/
