dave the non-polemic, I appreciated this. Whiles back I asked/challenged to know the pragmatic value of radical empiricism, and I'm glad to see a cogent answer. I figured if I was patient enough...
dmb resumes: > I take these examples literally. The mechanic, the mathematician, the > scientist and philosophers are all working within systems of rationality. > They're all doing intellectual work within the limits of language and > reason. But Pirsig is keen to get at "the Buddha that exists within analytic > thought, and gives that analytic thought its direction". This move solves a > whole slough of philosophical problems, but I think the main idea here is to > improve actual mechanics, scientists and philosophers. It's about bringing > all your faculties to bear and a deep engagement with whatever you're doing. > It is aimed at down to earth stuff, which a lofty and worthy goal. It's also > exceedingly sane, because that's where we live; practical, everyday reality. > > Well there are those dreamers, schemers and head-in-the-clouds type (mea culpa) that seem to spend more time contemplating abstractions than transactions. > And that, gents, is why I object to the neo-pragmatic slogan. Pirsig agrees > that our understanding of the world is a pile of analogies BUT he also says > that Quality is the generator of this mythos, guides the train that pulls > the boxcars full of analogies. The important idea here is that this central > term (Quality in the first book and Dynamic Quality in the second book) is > outside of language and outside of the mythos. This value-force is > pre-intellectual and yet he's asserting "the formal recognition of Quality" > within intellectual operations. That's what radical empiricism does. It > makes the dynamic a crucial phase in the overall cognitive process. It > explains the relations between the dynamic and static phases of experience > as aspects of a single, co-operative process. This "formal acknowledgment of > the role of Quality in the scientific process doesn't destroy the empirical > vision at all. It expands it, strengthens it and brings it far closer to > actual scientific practice > ." > > Ok then. This is a good explanation, as far as it goes. But getting into the meat of the moment I wonder *how *does it expand, strengthen and bring closer. From my perspective, it requires something very much like Tim says "faithe" to take a non-conceptual reality and use it in practical experience. > Again, I take the slogan to be a negative epistemological statement. It > doesn't say the universe is made of words. It says that we can't get outside > of language in an epistemological sense. It says our truths can only be > justified within language and by language. But Pirsig is saying there is > something outside of language that IS epistemologically important, that is > the generator of language and this is a part of experience too. If I and others oft seem befuddled by non-epistemological epistemology, can you blame us? And how you keep "generator of language" distinct from some form of theism is another befuddlement. It almost seems more like a ploy, than an actual philosophical thesis. > One of the ways he uses to show that Quality is real by showing how the > world can't function normally without it and trying to effect a repair job > on a mode of rationality that functions badly without it. Rationality itself > is the bike he's working on and fixing it entails a formal acknowledgment of > the role of Quality in the overall cognitive process. > > "Formal acknowledgement" translates to "rational explanation". Rational explanations of non-rational generators of language get me all tongue-tied - or the mental equivalent of that phenomenon. But despite my "mind-tied-ness" I feel like I'm closer to agreement with you here than I expected and there's satisfaction in this evolving process. A hope, even a faith, that rapprochement is achievable with patience. Take care, John 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
