Hi Krimel -- You folks have a peculiar notion of "culture" that strains common understanding. I don't know to what extent this has been fostered by Pirsig's anthropological perspective, but I suspect that it's another attempt to mythologize the individual.
For example, Krimel seems to believe that we are exposed to culture from the moment of conception:. [Krimel]: > The moment, location and circumstances under which we > enter and exist [in] the womb are cultural experiences. > Who raises us and how, are determined by culture. > Where we go to the bathroom and how we seek gratification > are cultural experiences. Knowledge is synthesized from > experience and culture not only shapes experience, it > provides context for the synthesis. I can understand "who raises us and how" to have cultural associations. I can even see how using the toilet is a cultural habit. But a fertilized ovum experiencing culture in the womb? If Krimel has evidence to support such an idea, I'd suggest that he bring it before a board of embryologists or psychologists. (It may trigger a whole new science of pre-natal culture!) Otherwise, I'm not convinced that "culture shapes experience", although I'm certain that value does. [Krimel]: > Carton, eggs, counting, subtracting come from and are > understood in their cultural context. No, Ham, practical > knowledge IS cultural knowledge. If you insist on using culture to mean "empirical", then all knowledge is cultural. But doesn't this distort the meaning of knowledge, which is the apprehension of facts and principles by the individual observer, whether such knowledge is of cultural, mathematical, logical, or physical precepts? [Ham, previously]: > Here's a prime example of what I meant by radical > empiricists "explaining away" the individual as myth.. > Descartes couldn't think, let alone exist, if it were > not for the culture of 17th Century France! [Krimel] > I agree to the extent that Pirsig's complaint is not at the > core of the cogito but a step removed. Descartes gives us > assurance that we exist. He offers little clarity on what > existence is or what gives rise to it. Most of the problems > arising from the cogito, concern this kind of secondary > question. I agree. But explaining subjective knowledge as a cultural phenomenon muddies the waters even more. --Ham 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/
