Hi Ham, > > The underlying assumption in your egg carton example > > is that experience can be divided into wholes and parts. > > Not a bad assumption as assumptions go, but an > > assumption nevertheless. > > Actually it's a mathematical law supported by definitions: 12 divided by two > equals 6, and a dozen means 12. Yes, if it is understood that all truth is > relative, and absolute truth is not accessible to humans, then everything we > know can be considered an assumption. But who among us can fully > participate in the life-experience believing that it's just an assumption?
Everything we know is based on assumptions. The one assumption that I find especially convincing is Pirsig's "Quality is the primary empirical reality of the world." (Lila, 5) I know it's just an assumption, one that you find unconvincing (to say the least). But I find myself fully participating in life experiences regardless of my -- perhaps erroneous -- belief in that assumption. [Platt] > > I assume you recognize some of the assumptions of your > > own philosophy, such as "we can know only what we can > > experience." (I assume you consider your philosophy a > > form of knowledge.) > > Essentialism is a concept of reality, much as the MoQ is a concept of > existence. An ontological hypothesis affords a reality perspective that > can't be confirmed like scientific principles and mathematical laws. An > unproven hypothesis can never be equated with knowledge because it isn't > "factual". On the other hand, a well-developed ontology can satisfy man's > quest for meaning in a way that objective knowledge never can. > > [Arlo]: > > When you change your assumptions, if you feel the new > > form of knowledge has Quality, you accept both it and the > > assumptions underlying it. > > I don't understand the logic of this assertion, which seems to contradict > Arlo's own argument. What does "feeling a form of knowledge has Quality" > mean to Arlo? If "feeling" is the criterion for what has quality, why do > Arlo, Krimel, and Pirsig deplore the spiritual feelings of theists and > mystics? If the cognizant individual is only a myth or "abstraction of > levels", as they claim, how can one's feelings have any validity? > > If I am convinced that Essence is the primary reality, is my conviction not > a feeling? In MoQ terms, Essentialism is a "form of knowledge that has > Quality" for me. By what justification, then, am I to be chastised for what > I believe? Is Pirsig less culpable for positing Quality as reality because > "it doesn't need to be defined"? > > [Platt]: > > I can understand if you just went by what Arlo says > > that you would get the idea that Pirsig is just another > > New Age Marxist since Arlo always extols the wonders > > of society, community, culture, co-operation, sacrifice and > > every other form of collectivism. But, let not your heart be > > troubled. Pirsig is an individualist from the get go, as > > witness his two books centered around the lives of very > > unique individuals, including himself. > > What is "unique" about the lives of Phaedrus, Lila, and Rigel? While > Phaedrus may reflect some of the author's experiences, I have no reason to > believe that they are anything but fictional characters in a novel. Fictional maybe, but individuals without doubt. He could have gone the academic route like most philosophers who put forth a thesis with nary a human being in sight. That he choose to express himself through people's experiences is significant. > I > appreciate your ZMM quotation, Platt, but I think you can find other > sentiments expressed that lean heavily toward socialism. And Arlo is right > about Pirsig's politics. Have you seen this 2006 Pirsig interview with Tim > Adams for the The Observer? > TA: It's a strange time to be American. Everything seems to be so > polarised. > > RP: It's a version of the old capital-versus-labour dispute, I guess. > > The Democrats, Al Gore, would have won without Lewinsky I think. I had a > lot of time for Clinton but I still fault him for a lot of the stuff that > has followed. > > TA: Have your politics changed over the years? > > RP: I have been a lifelong Democrat. I was born in the state of > Hubert Humphrey who was, I believe, one of the most intelligent people > ever to get into politics. My girlfriend lived across the street from him > and I would see him from time to time. Speak to him. Like all ideas, though, > the Democrat ideas need to be Dynamic. It's like Lila, it needs to be kept > current. > http://robertpirsig.org/Observer%20Interview.htm Like many lifelong Democrats, he sounds as if he is becoming increasingly wary of the drift of the Democratic party to the radical left. The Marxist ideas Obama and Hillary espouse can hardly be termed "Dynamic." > I don't berate people for their political views, Platt. But can there be > any doubt in your mind that the predominant morality of this forum is > Statist Socialism? No doubt at all. But "predominance" doesn't mean there aren't conservatives attracted to the MOQ. There have been a number of contributors to this forum over the years who hold freedom from authoritarianism as the highest of all values, further convinced no doubt by many of Pirsig's statements such as, " . . . the moral right of intellect to be free of social control . . .," "What's good is freedom from domination by any static pattern . . ." (Lila, 24), and his oft-quoted endorsement of the free market,. "A free market is a Dynamic institution." (Lila, 17) . But, perhaps his most significant affirmation of conservatism comes early on in Lila. "Of all the contributions America has made to the history of the world, the idea of freedom from a social hierarchy has been the greatest. It was fought for in the American Revolution and confirmed in the Civil War. To this day it's still the most powerful, compelling ideal holding the whole nation together." (Lila, 3) In other words, freedom from a ruling elite -- a fundamental conservative principle. Best regards, 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/
