[Krimel] > I think the MoQ addresses this problem by refusing to define an Absolute > Truth.
Except in the case of the hot stove: "Whether the stove is the cause of the low quality or whether possibly something else is the cause is not yet absolutely certain. But that the quality is low is absolutely certain." (Lila, 5) And the case of the germ vs. the doctor: "But what's not so obvious is that, given a value-centered Metaphysics of Quality, it is absolutely, scientifically moral for a doctor to prefer the patient. This is not just an arbitrary social convention that should apply to some doctors but not to all doctors, or to some cultures but not all cultures. It's true for all people at all times, now and forever, a moral pattern of reality as real as H20." (Lila, 13) But Pirsig also said: "But if Quality or excellence is seen as the ultimate reality then it becomes possible for more than one set of truths to exist. Then one doesn't seek the absolute "Truth." One seeks instead the highest quality intellectual explanation of things with the knowledge that if the past is any guide to the future this explanation must be taken provisionally; as useful until something better comes along." (Lila, 8) The Truth is that Pirsig sometimes contradicts himself, including denying Truth while invoking it, as when asserting " . . . this explanation must be taken provisionally, as useful until something better comes along." 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/
