not from my own reading Gav, niether Plato, Socrates nor Aristotle say that. Both are relative, Pirsig in the same tradition agrees that the test of the good, which is a species of the true, lies in experience. The emphasis of this tradition is in meaning.
----- Original Message ---- From: gav <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sat, February 6, 2010 6:30:46 PM Subject: Re: [MD] Intellect's Symposium plato: good is relative; truth is absolute pirsig: truth is relative; good is absolute is this summary accurate? --- On Sun, 7/2/10, david buchanan <[email protected]> wrote: > From: david buchanan <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [MD] Intellect's Symposium > To: [email protected] > Received: Sunday, 7 February, 2010, 9:55 AM > > > Marsha said: > Here's is a broad definition of relativism by Ugo Zilioli: > "Statements in a certain domain can be deemed correct or > incorrect only relative to some framework" > > dmb says: > Okay. That's a very vague version of the specific case I > just made, which was relativism as it relates to linguistic > contexts. I believe that definition is far too general to be > meaningful here AND it comes from a defender of relativism. > > > Marsha said: > Appealing to the authority of 'most postmodernists?' > Is this the 'case' you made? > > dmb says: > Authority? I don't know what you're talking about. I merely > described the general position held by postmodern thinks in > addition to the particular position held by a specific > thinker. Your objections and questions seem increasingly > insincere, like you're trying to complicate simple things on > purpose. Why? > dmb had said: > As I understand it, the MOQ agrees with contextualism > (we're suspended in language) and it agrees that these > contexts are constructed (analogy upon analogy) but it says > these contexts are not constructed arbitrarily (Quality is > not arbitrary or capricious) and the pragmatic theory of > truth does not abandon empirical restraints (it has to agree > with experience and function in experience). These > non-linguistic constraints distinguish the MOQ from this > relativism. > > Marsha replied: > Where does the MoQ agree with > contextualism? I thought the MoQ agreed > with Protagoras' Measure Doctrine. Arbitrary and > capricious? Is 'arbitrary and capricious' your > definition of relativism? > > dmb says: > > All of the stuff I put in parentheses references Pirsig > quotes. I can't tell you what page it is where Pirsig agrees > with the notion that "we're suspended in language", where > Pirsig says our world is built of analogies, where Pirsig > says that Quality is "not arbitrary or capricious". But > you've seen them. You know they're in there. And how can you > ask about the measure doctrine as if I hadn't just quoted > Pirsig on that? He said virtue "was absolutely central to > their teaching, but how are you going to teach virtue if you > teach the relativity of all ethical ideas?" and "QUALITY! > VIRTUE! DHARMA! THAT is what the Sophists were teaching! NOT > ethical relativism."? > > Marsha said: > There is only one kind of truth individuals have knowledge > of and that is static quality, and that is relative to the > "different static pattern of life history" and the immediate > direct experience. As I understand it, the > MoQ agrees with relativism (relative to experience). > > > dmb says: > > Well I don't know how to distinguish that from solipsism or > plain old narcissism. I don't understand how you can > relativism out of this stuff when Pirsig is so plainly and > explicitly saying that the Sophists were teaching Quality > and "not ethical relativism". Especially since he's saying > that just as the central quest of the whole book is finally > resolved. > > > But you are at a distinct advantage being a relativist > because that means you can't really be wrong about > relativism or anything else. Must be nice. Maybe I should > convert and then I can just respond to objections by saying, > "well, it's true for me" or "it's true in my context". > That'll be so much easier. Ah, I feel relieved of a great > burden already. Thanks Marsha. > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM > protection. > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469226/direct/01/ > 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/ > __________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, legally, and for free at PLUS7. www.tv.yahoo.com.au/plus7 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/
