Hi Ham, Pirsig was just pointing out the pitfalls of creating a metaphysics on the ineffable. He then does his best to provide a basis for it. Mark
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Ham Priday <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jun 10, 2011, at 1:02 PM, david buchanan wrote: > >> Like the man says, and like every reasonable person knows, >> metaphysics must be definable, divisible and knowable or >> there isn't any metaphysics. >> >> "Since a metaphysics is essentially a kind of dialectical definition >> and since Quality is essentially outside definition, this means that >> a 'Metaphysics of Quality' is essentially a contradiction in terms, >> a logical absurdity." (LILA, Chapter 5) > > Why, then, did the man choose to call his Quality thesis a "metaphysics"? > Did he want his acolytes to spend their time trying to resolve a > contradiction? > > Just curious, > 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
