Bo said to Andre:
In the non-SOM MOQ there is no real/theoretical distinction (this is the 4th.
level's value) the DQ/SQ split has taken over from the S/O split.
DMB said:
Oh, I see. I think you're suffering from a misconception that is easily clear
up by a simple statement. DQ and sq are both real. They're different to be sure
and so it makes tons of sense to split things up that way but this distinction
shouldn't be taken to mean that static quality is unreal. Here it can help to
recall that other simple statement; experience is reality. That's the easiest
formulation of radicial empiricism. DQ and sq are both known in experience.
Bo said:
I am the one who have kept repeating that the DQ/SQ has taken over from the S/O
and - further - that these splits are NOT of any pre-existing reality sitting
up there waiting to be split (Matt Kundert agreed.Please come forward Matt!)
How you read any misconception of the DQ/SQ not being real is beyond me.
Matt:
Personally, I think if any dialogue is going to happen between the various
parties to dispute (_any_ of the disputes that have been going on for years),
all sides need to ramp back the rhetoric, all sides need to stop thinking they
know the other person and what they want to say, all sides need to go back to
square one, and everyone needs to go slowly, one step at a time, in figuring
out what each other thinks, why they think it, and where the real disagreements
lie. As long as people keep jumping to conclusions--even if they are in the
long-run right--and triumphantly trumpeting "I've been saying this for years!"
or "you've been saying the same stupid shit for years!", or if they keep
imputing that the other person has just been too stupid to understand the
obvious, then conversational will stall on the issue of dickish behavior. We
need to stop treating each other like children that need to be condescended to,
and more like conversational peers that are to be treated with respect (even
if, in your heart of hearts, you think the other is acting like a child and not
really a peer).
That's just a suggestion, if people really want to discuss stuff with each
other.
If we just take the above passages from Bo and DMB, without any other gloss on
the statements--I don't see the difference between what Bo said and DMB said.
Bo wants to eliminate a pernicious distinction (that I would suggest is
inherited from Lockean/Humean empiricism, only updated after Kant) that the
"analytic knife" section in ZMM can be taken to illustrate: there is a
pre-existing reality (the sand) that our concepts can divide up as we want.
This section can breed a philosophical position that perceives the sand as
real, and the divisions we make as arbitrary add-ons. This leads to
regrettable statements like, "value is more immediate, more directly sensed
than any 'self'
or any 'object' to which it might be later
assigned. It is more
real than the stove." (Lila, 76) We just
should not use "more real" rhetoric to make our point.
Pirsig wants to avoid the same thing, and spends much of his time fighting
these distinctions. DMB registers the same rejection of this distinction,
which Bo formuated as the real/theoretical distinction, when he forwards the
pragmatist slogan common to James, Dewey and Pirsig--experience is reality.
This is what I call panrelationalism--not only are relations between objects as
real as the objects, there is nothing more to any object than a series of
relations. (What are these relations? _Value_ relations.)
Bo said:
Again, the radical empiricism postulate a something ahead of S and O.
Matt:
Not really, at least not a good formulation of it. It is radical exactly
because everything is now real--relations, concepts, and objects--unlike before
where something was only real if it could stretch back to some strange thing
called an "empirical object" which philosophers had a tough time explicating.
Matt
_________________________________________________________________
Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn “10 hidden secrets” from Jamie.
http://windowslive.com/connect/post/jamiethomson.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!550F681DAD532637!5295.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_domore_092008
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/
