Without a word you watch someone buy a hot dog from a vendor, take one bite spits it out and argues with the vendor.
You go over and buy a hot dog, take a bite and tastes of bleach, and spit it out. I ask, was this affimed liguistically or experientially? was this affirmation based on Quality of experience? certainly not from any definition. Do you see our point? ________________________________ From: X Acto <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2009 8:59:14 PM Subject: Re: [MD] Faith/Skepticism Michael: I have been up front about using the word "faith" and with a specific meaning: "affirmation absent proof" So with *this* definition of faith, prove my initial statement wrong that it takes faith to affirm Quality. Prove to me that a rock is a rock for the same reason a dog lays down in the sun; because of Quality. Show me the objective rational measure of Quality you use to affirm it. If you can, you are not affirming the same Quality as Pirsig. Pirsig is quite clear that Quality cannot be defined. If you can't define something you can't prove it. To prove something is to define it. If you affirm something you cannot define, you are affirming something you cannot prove, it is an "affirmation absent proof." Faith. Ron: To prove something may be to experience it. Perhaps this is the meaning you miss. 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/ 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/
