Back in June Matt said:
"... if determinism is the thesis that we are caught up in causal chains, then
it is not destructive of moral reasoning because moral reasoning is something
that occurs partly _because_ of causal chains. Moral reasoning _needs_ causal
chains. And if that's the case, why on earth would determinism destroy moral
reasoning?"
dmb says:
I don't think the claim is that determinism destroys moral REASONING, although
that might be true too. The claim is the determinism precludes moral
responsibility. If we are caught up in causal chains, then our actions are
determined by those laws rather than by our choices.
Matt also said:
I think it's a mistake to think that the MoQ "does away with cause and effect."
I don't think that's exactly what Pirsig meant.
dmb says:
If we are talking about Pirsig's reformulation of free will and determinism,
then that is exactly what Pirsig meant. He gets rid of causality and replaces
with preferences and values.
"In the past the logic has been that if chemistry professors are composed
exclusively of atoms and if atoms follow only the law of cause and effect, then
chemistry professors must follow the laws of cause and effect too. But this
logic can be applied in a reverse direction. We can just as easily deduce
themorality of atoms from the observation that chemistry professors are, in
general, moral. If chemistry professors exercise choice, and
chemistryprofessors are composed exclusively of atoms, then it follows that
atoms must exercise choice too. The difference between these two points of
viewis philosophic, not scientific." (Pirsig in Lila 157)
"Scientific materialism, which is commoner among lay followers of science than
among scientists themselves, holds that what is composed of matter or energy
and is measurable by the instruments of science is real. Anything else is
unreal, or at least of no importance." (Pirisg in ZAMM)
"Determinism is the philosophic doctrine that man, like all other objects in
the universe, follows fixed scientific laws, and does so without exception. ...
If man follows the cause-and-effect laws of substance, then man cannot really
choose between right and wrong. On the other hand, if the determinists let go
of their position it would seem to deny the truth of science. If one adheres to
a traditional scientific metaphysics of substance, the philosophy of
determinism is an inescapable corollary. If 'everything' is included in the
class of 'substance and its properties,' and if 'substance and properties' is
included in the class of 'things that always follow laws,' and if 'people' are
included int class 'everything', then it is an air-tight logical conclusion
that people always follow the laws of substance. ...All the social sciences,
including anthropology, were founded on the bedrock metaphysical belief that
these physical cause-and-effect laws of human behavior exist. Mor
al laws, if they can be said to exist at all, are merely an artificial social
code that has nothing to do with the real nature of the world." (Pirsig in Lila
155-6)
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
