Hey Ron,
Ron said:
What you are pointing out Platt is how Objectivism simply can not
objectify Subjective experience. Therefore "Truth" as we know it
objectively, is based in subjective belief. Which can not be objectively
verified. "Truth" Therefore is a term like "Quality" it is neither
subjective nor objective It is both. This is why Pirsig attempts to
redefine distinctive expression And redefine the terms of truth finding
by placing it in pre-intellectual Experience. "Truth" then is
experience. Not an intellectual pattern.
Matt:
I'm wary of your manner of use of the objective/subjective distinction,
but what I'm really interested in is what you are referring to in
Pirsig's texts for his attempts to:
"redefine distinctive expression"
and
"redefine the terms of truth-finding by placing it in pre-intellectual
experience"
These are unconventional ways of describing something that Pirsig does,
so much so that I'm not exactly sure what you are thinking of. For
instance, the latter is something that, at first consideration without
guidance, seems just superficially wrong. I'm not sure Pirsig says
anything that I would relate to the "terms of truth-finding" as being
related to what he means by "pre-intellectual experience." So what's
up?
Ron:
Hello Matt,
What I meant by the latter statement "redefine the terms of
truth-finding
by placing it in pre-intellectual experience" is that objectivism
defines
Certainty intellectually where as Pirsig places certainty
pre-intellectually. He stated in a letter to Dr. Gurr that he felt
Pre-intellectual experience was more empirical than objectivism
Because it's verifiability is experience itself not in a logically
Supported statement of truth.
I may have mashed together a few terms creating a vague statement
When I said "redefine distinctive expression" I admit I hastily
Threw that phrase together. What I mean is that Pirsig is not
Creating an axiom in the use of DQ/SQ but he is asking us to
Rethink how we view and therefore describe experience.
I'll explain.
The title of this thread, I must admit, interested me greatly
Because this is the area I am studying and exploring at the moment.
Linguistic philosophy. When trying to prove to Bo that SOM
Is not the only intellectual pattern, I began to investigate other
cultures grammar and how they defined terms, most importantly nouns, for
They are what sentences and statements are built around. I found
That many times meanings are lost in translations by the sheer way
A language handles noun cases. I found English used an abstract/
Concrete distinction in the formation of nouns in a sentence whereas
Other languages do not, I found it interesting that eastern languages
use passive/ active, much like Pirsigs dynamic/static in use.
This is why the east does not see the MoQ as anything new and
Why the Chinese paradox of the white horse is nothing special
In English.
It occurred to me that this is where the idea of subject/object
Arises from, how our language forms nouns. I began to see that
How we form sentences is how we intellectualize and how we form
Statements of "truth" was also how we utilized language.
English tends to use concrete distinction in meaning when
Creating objective statements of truth.
This made me look at what DQ/SQ performed as a function in this way
And when I did, a lot of the MoQ conflicts were resolved and all
Of Pirsigs concepts supported each other in one cohesive whole
Metaphysic. It also explained the differing interpretations of
The discuss and why MoQ wasn't really developing but at a stalemate
In interpretations. With this clarified I feel it dispels a lot of the
ambiguity of MoQ meaning.
I had made the statement that grammar supplies the rules for intellect
and it Was not received warmly.
What greatly interested me about this was that the first cultures
To develop grammar were the first to develop logic and philosophy,
The Indic culture and the Greek culture respectively.
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/
