Greetings Ham, Would you please post the citation to the essay, I would like to read more. Maybe Ron could offer the citation for his Aristotle translation too.
Marsha On Jan 4, 2010, at 3:17 AM, Ham Priday wrote: > > Greetings Ron, Marsha, Andre, Ian, Matt, and All -- > > There is intrinsic truth in the "man-measure" statement of Protagoras that > neither the law of the excluded middle nor the incompleteness of knowledge > can refute. I ran across a slightly different translation of that dictum in > the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: > > "Of all things the measure is man, of the things that are, that [or 'how'] > they are, and of things that are not, that [or 'how'] they are not." > > The essay goes on to say: > "The test case normally used is temperature. If Ms. X. says 'it is hot,' > then the statement (unless she is lying) is true for her. Another person, > Ms. Y, may simultaneously claim 'it is cold.' This statement could also be > true for her. If Ms. X normally lives in Alaska and Ms. Y in Florida, the > same temperature (e.g. 25 Celsius) may seem hot to one and cool to the other. > The measure of hotness or coldness is fairly obviously the individual > person. One cannot legitimately tell Ms. X she does not feel ot - she is > the only person who can accurately report her own perceptions or sensations. > In this case, it is indeed impossible to contradict as Protagoras is held to > have said. > > "But what if Ms. Y, in claiming it feels cold, suggests that unless the heat > is turned on the pipes will freeze? One might suspect that she has a fever > and her judgment is unreliable; the measure may still be the individual > person, but it is an unreliable one, like a broken ruler or unbalanced scale. > In a modern scientific culture, with a predilection for scientific > solutions, we would think of consulting a thermometer to determine the > objective truth. The Greek response was to look at the more profound > philosophical implications." > > This brings up the question of "subjective" vs. "objective" truth, a > distinction which Pirsigians probably won't acknowledge. However, inasmuch > as the experience of Quality is the foundation of the MoQ, and it is Man, > after all, who experiences, you folks should have no problem with the > proposition that Man is the _qualitative_ measure of all things. That leaves > "objective truth" hanging in limbo. > > Indeed, just what is objective truth? > > For the scientist, it is a fact or principle which is universally accepted > because it has been consistently confirmed by repeated testing and by the > predictability of the result when applied to a cause-and-effect system (i.e., > empirical reality). And what does "empirical" mean? My dictionary defines > empirical as "originating in or based on observation or experience." It does > no good to argue that objective measurements are "non-qualitative" simply > because they are expressed as numeric or statistical values. The "proof" of > a yard-long board is to lay it on a yardstick and confirm that it is 36 > inches in length. Is there really a distinction to be made between > experiencing and measuring? I submit that the length of the board, whether > regarded as a quantitative or a qualitative fact, is an attribute of a > commonly experienced object, just as the process of measuring it is an > experience. > > I define the essential self as "value-sensibility", so I prefer the original > "man = measure" concept. But the Kundert/Untersteiner "alternative > translation" -- "Man is the master of all experience" -- adds even more > support to Protagoras' maxim. What we know as Truth is what we experience, > and from that comes quantitative as well as qualitative knowledge. The only > doubt about the veracity of "experienced truth" arises when the experience is > proprioceptive (sensory or psycho-emotional), such as when we feel "hot" or > "cold", pain or pleasure, beauty or grossness, without empirical evidence to > corroborate our feeling. But if, as Pirsig says, "experience is the cutting > edge of reality," then Truth is ultimately the Value of our individual > sensibility. > > Happy Year 2010 to all, > 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/ _______________________________________________________________________ Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars... 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/
