Hi Ron, (Bo mentioned) A most interesting post. Thanks!
> 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. Right. "But that the quality is low is absolutely certain. It is the primary empirical reality from which such things as stoves and heat and oaths and self are later intellectually constructed." (Lila, 5) I like Pirsig's description -- "absolutely certain." Postmodernists would rather die than write those words, indicating Pirsig is no postmodernist. > 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. Can you provide an example or two of how your approach resolves MOQ conflicts? > 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. Grammar, logic, intellectual patterns are all tightly interconnected. But, as useful as they are, they are limited. From the physicist Paul Davies: "Godel's theorem warns us that the axiomatic method of making logical deductions from given assumptions cannot in general provide a system which is both provable and consistent. There will always be truth that lies beyond, that cannot reached from a finite collection of axioms. In the end a rational explanation of the world in the sense of closed and complete system of logical truths is almost certainly impossible. We are barred from ultimate knowledge, from ultimate explanation, by the very rules of reasoning that prompt us to seek an explanation in the first place. If we wish to progress beyond, we have to embrace a different concept of 'understanding' from that of rational explanation." > 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. Maybe Bo, who is knowledgeable about the contributions of ancient Greece, can expand on your observation. 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/
