Hey Platt --
I don't see where Quality is any more irrational than your uncreated Creator. Both are "outside rational analysis." But Quality has the advantage of being experience, or in SOM terms, being experienced every day.
Two things: Unlike your esteemed author, I do not claim to be an anti-theist. Also, what makes my Essence concept "rational" is the logic that only an uncreated absolute source (Cusa's "not-other") transcends experiential existence.
To believe in an uncreated Creator is a matter of faith is it not? Unlike the Essence idea of an uncreated Creator, the MOQ idea that some things are better than others cannot be denied. My cat, UTOE, demonstrates the latter every day.
It's "a matter of faith" only in the sense that I can't empirically prove my conviction. But then, neither can Mr. Pirsig prove that Quality is "the primary empirical reality". The trope "some things are better than others" tells us nothing but that experience comes in a range from the desirable to the undesirable. It doesn't validate the theory that the universe is morally good (or bad) or that everything moves to "betterness". Moreover, it doesn't explain what brings value into the world or what gives man (and sometimes less cognitive creatures) the capacity for discretionary judgment.
In addition to avoiding the illogic of a universe created from chaos or nothingness, a philosophy founded on Essence as the primary source can rationally account for the "how" and "why" of all these matters. What non-faith-based answers are offered in the MoQ?
Another home run for Essentialism. Keep 'em coming, Platt! Best regards, Ham 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/
