Greetings Dmb,
On Sep 1, 2011, at 2:14 PM, david buchanan wrote: > > "...and most of the troubles are caused by what old time radio men called a > 'short between the earphones,' failures to use the head properly. A > motorcycle functions entirely in accordance with the laws of reason, and a > study of the art of motorcycle maintenance is really a miniature study of the > art of rationality itself. ...to get into that it's vital to stay with > down-to-earth examples of rationality, so as not to get lost in generalities > no one else can understand. Talk about rationality can get very confusing > unless the things with which rationality deals are also included. ... In a > motorcycle this precision isn't maintained for any romantic or perfectionist > reasons. It's simply that the enormous forces of heat and explosive pressure > inside the engine can only be controlled through the kind of precision these > instruments give." (ZAMM, 98-9) > > "Definitions are the FOUNDATION of reason. You can't reason without them." > (Emphasis is Pirsig's. ZAMM, 214.) And so you wrote: >> dmb says: >> Another good point. Pirsig's rejection of the Cartesian self certainly >> doesn't mean the MOQ rejects any conception of the self. The MOQ's self >> includes the body as well as the mind. And so I ask: Is this your definition/understanding of self within the MoQ? Marsha ___ 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
