Well put Ham. I didn't know that Mao had a BA in English composition. Mark
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:33 PM, Ham Priday <[email protected]> wrote: > Greetings, Steve [Mark, Platt quoted] -- > On 19 Oct 2010 at 6:54 PM. Mark wrote: > >> Science is based on a system of equality through measurement. >> The accurate measurement of truth lies outside in the regions of >> religion or philosophy or just plain common sense. Such truth is >> not derived through scientific methods, but through more intuitive >> approaches. Our communication with Quality at a fundamental >> level is not measurable, it creates the concept of measurement >> itself. It is impossible for a calculator to calculate itself. >> > > Platt responded: > >> I couldn't agree with you more. You have deftly revealed what's >> behind the curtain of science's claim to "truth." What's true is what >> Pirsig observed: "Science has no values. Not officially." Just as it is >> impossible for a calculator to calculate itself, it's impossible for a >> discipline that has no values to comprehend values. >> > > To which you said: > >> You missed the point as usual. In the bit you refer to here Pirsig >> tried to get science to recognize that it actually does have values >> not to argue that we ought to get rid of science or remind science >> to stay in its value-neutral place. Instead he wanted to expand >> the concept of rationality--a root expansion of reason--so it can >> deal with values and so values can be opened to rational inquiry. >> What you are arguing against is pretty much Pirsig's main >> philosophical project in his two books. >> > > When are we ever going to cease complaining about Science, Steve? The > knowledge and achievements gleaned from objective science have raised the > standard of human life substantially over the last 200 years. Pronouncements > about morality were never the province of Science which has gotten along > quite well, thank you, without an invasion of moralists determined to reform > its methodology. > > For a philosopher with a bachaleaurate degree in English Composition to > demand that we "kill the intellectuals...kill them all!" it's the height of > hypocrisy to suggest that we "expand the concept of rationality...so that it > can deal with values." The "values" Science deals with are necessarily > quantitative and expressed in numbers and equations. That's what makes > scientific conclusions efficacious and reliable. To impose subjective > precepts about morality on this discipline would only destroy its usefulness > and set human thinking back to the 16th century. > > Morality is a societal code derived from subjective value-judgments that > have nothing to do with validating objective truths or defining universal > laws. Indeed, moral behavior is indigenous to the local culture, and any > attempt to establish a moral system that works for all mankind is bound to > fail. This is why the U.S. has been unsuccessful in nation-building aimed > at turning backward nations like Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan into democratic > republics. > > Essentially speaking, > 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/md/archives.html > 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
