On 9 May 2008 at 13:00, Heather Perella wrote:
> SA: Bo, this is what I mean. Where up above do you
> say what dq/sq split is, other than an axiom? This is
> the same as saying lapodocoldieameida is reality. I'm
> not trying to be harsh, but if you can't say what
> dq/sq split is, then lapodocoldieameida might be
> better instead. Don't you think? Is your reality
> complete mu, complete denial of everything, such as
> Jainism? If these comments are true, then your
> reality is truly personal, thus, something I wouldn't
> know about only you would. Is that your intent?
You must be denser than the Adirondack woods. Do you think
that a metaphysics can start without one or more axioms? And
accusing ME of the DQ/SQ just being an axiom!! I have been
around this discussion under the impression of the participants
knowing the basics of philosophy, but must obviously revise
this.
Now, my frustration dissipated, I will admit that Pirsig actually
tried to hide the axiomatic nature of his Reality=Quality sentence
by trying to show that quality permeates it all (the Hot Stove
example) but this is futile, what reality is before a split is "mu",
the MOQ starts with the DQ/SQ split and it's best stated that this
is an axiom, but creates a better metaphysics than the SOM.
In ZAMM Pirsig uses Euclid's geometry to show that E. tried to
hide one axiom as "natural", namely the fifth.
It had long been sought in vain, he said, to demonstrate
the axiom known as Euclid's fifth postulate 268 and this
search was the start of the crisis. Euclid's postulate of
parallels, which states that through a given point there's
not more than one parallel line to a given straight line, we
usually learn in tenth-grade geometry. It is one of the
basic building blocks out of which the entire mathematics
of geometry is constructed.
When this was demasked by Bolyai and Lobachevski, other
geometries were suddenly possible.
I believe Pirsig compared himself with this, he himself having
demasked SOM's hidden axiom that, like Euclid's 5th, looked
obvious but being revealed allowed for a new non-S/O
metaphysics, something he created, but tried to avoid the
Euclidian trap by making the MOQ a mere theory about Quality.
While I think he should have faced the bull and declared the
DQ/SQ as his axiom that would create a better metaphysics.
The Quality=Reality can be compared to a geometrican declaring
space to be the real thing and all geometries just theories about
it, but we know that it's the other way round, geometries CREATE
our notion of space.
Nuff said
Bo
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/
