Hello Steve,
> Ron:
> Truth is a species of the good, and being a species of the good
> it is a first priciple of explaination. Especially since the Good
> accounts for all experience. I would say thats an explaination thats out side
> of
> culture and history.
Steve:
All explanations are created to serve certain human purposes. The idea
that truth is a species of good does not stand outside of history and
culture. It is the sort of thing that only someone who has read
certain books would say. You wouldn't have said this if you hadn't
read Pirsig and if Pirsig hadn't read James and if James hadn't read
Pierce, and on and on. Recall that as Pirsig pointed out, Descartes'
famous attempt to assert the first ahistorical truth was a success in
a way but not in the way Descartes had hoped:
"Descartes' "I think therefore I am" was a historically shattering
declaration of independence of the intellectual level of evolution from the
social level of evolution, but would he have said it if he had been a
seventeenth century Chinese philosopher? If he had been, would anyone in
seventeenth century China have listened to him and called him a brilliant
thinker and recorded his name in history? If Descartes had said, "The
seventeenth century French culture exists, therefore I think, therefore I
am," he would have been correct."
Ron:
True, but seventeenth French culture would'nt exist without the
the country of france, on the euro asian continent on the planet earth.
I can go into geoloical conditions, water supply, climate, food ect..
Although social level emphasis is something I agree with, it is'nt the
limit of the good, you neglect inorganic and biological good which shapes
culture. making them outside cultural good.
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/md/archives.html
