[Ham]
If you really believe that mathematics is culturally determined, Krimel...

[Krimel]
Even mathematicians debate whether mathematics is discovered or invented.
But how mathematics is used and described are purely cultural.

[Ham]
...then you are using "cultural" as a synonym for "empirical".  

[Krimel]
Not at all, empirical refers to what comes in through the senses. Culture
tells us what to make of this. 

[Ham]
Do you also believe that logical principles are culturally determined?  

[Krimel]
Like math we could argue about whether logical principles are invented or
discovered but there is no argument that culture determines how such
principles are used.

[Ham]
That the fact of your existence is culturally determined?   Do you regard
physical reality--the objective world--as culture?
If your answer to these questions is 'yes', could you define what cultural 
means to you?

[Krimel]
Yes, yes and yes! Culture really is that damn big. In fact the concept is so
important you seriously should educate yourself about it. It is critical to 
The study of psychology, which looks at how individuals act in response to
culture, sociology which studies how cultural institutions work and effect
groups of individuals and anthropology which looks at the differences
between cultures. Of course all of this affects and spills over into
politics and economics. I am over simplifying here of course but I can not
over emphasize how important it is to understand this concept. The fact that
you don't speaks volumes about why many of your ideas seem so archaic and
odd.

Try this. If you look around you and take away the various things in your
environment that are NOT purely culturally determined you will find yourself
standing speechless and naked in a forest listening to the birds sing and
wondering if there are bears nearby.
 
> [Krimel]
> I think your teleological notion is grossly mistaken but
> I don't see how it connects in the least to subjectivity.

[Ham]
Well then, please tell me how teleology connects to objectivity, since is it

clear that nothing of your selfness is subjective.  It's understandable that

Pirsig would want to resolve the subject/object duality through a Quality 
ontology.  But I find it incredulous that an MoQer could view his reality as

totally otherness.

[Krimel]
It should be obvious to you by now that I don't think teleology connects to
objectivity at all. I regard it as a purely subjective quality. I have a
purpose. I have goals, needs, desires and ends. I share many of these in
common with the people around me but the world, the universe, reality does
not. It is cold and purposeless and indifferent.

> [Krimel]
> But when such an ontology runs counter to and leads away
> from what is confirmed by science and math, it deserves to be
> rejected regardless of whatever satisfaction it affords.
> Frankly, if "satisfaction" is all we are looking for heroin is a surer 
> bet.

[Ham]
I expect you to tell me that science and math are "culturally determined". 
In that case, what makes them sacrosanct?  I see nothing about culture that 
is stable, reliable, or revealing of truth.  

[Krimel]
Saying that our perceptions are culturally determined, even saying that much
of what culture determines is arbitrary, does not diminish the value and
importance of them. The rules of chess are entirely arbitrary but by
following them we can participate together in a meaningful activity. Culture
establishes the rules of the games we play. It gives us common reference
points and adds stability to our interactions together.

Science aims to study things regardless of culture but in fact how those
discoveries are used and what new discoveries we seek after are largely
culturally determined. Still these disciplines provide gauges as to what can
be agreed upon for the present. They are in the business of revealing not so
much what is true but what can be demonstrated to be false. Much of your
philosophy particularly your idea of a fixed and static reality have been
shown to be false in this way. 

[Ham]
Of course, were I to take up heroine smoking I might have a different view.
At least I am certain of my subjective existence, an assumption which you
appear to be grappling with. 
It must be the pot!

[Krimel]
It is a joy to talk to you, Ham. You are so utterly clueless. I suppose you
could smoke heroin but most serious users inject it. I would not recommend
it for you but seriously if you could score acid, mescaline, psilocybin or
any other industrial strength hallucinogen you ought to give it a try. I
suspect I am not alone here in thinking it would do you a world of good.

[Ham]
Talk to me when your head has cleared.

[Krimel]
You ought to heed what the dormouse said, "Feed your head."


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/

Reply via email to