Marhsa said: We have been through this before in the 'Humanism' thread November 2010. I do not mean an "anything goes" absolute, ethical relativism. Conventional (static) truth is relative; relative to an individual's static pattern history and the dynamics of the particular event. Truths may be judged within the MoQ based on their placement within the evolutionary, four-level, hierarchical structure.
dmb says: Yea, I know. You still don't see any reason to give up relativism. No worries. I was talking to Mark. Maybe he'll see the reason. > On Oct 23, 2011, at 2:31 PM, david buchanan wrote: > > > > > > > Marsha said to Mark: > > > > I am quite comfortable with conventional (static) truth being relative. It > > is a word comfortably used within Buddhism and I see no reason to reject. > > > > > > Pirsig gives us lots of reasons to believe that truth is more than merely > > relative, Quality is track that guides the formation of both facts and > > moral truths: > > > > What guarantees the objectivity of the world in which we live is that this > > world is common to us with other thinking beings. Through the > > communications that we have with other men we receive from them ready-made > > harmonious reasonings. ..And as these reasonings appear to fit the world of > > our sensations, we think we may infer that these reasonable beings have > > seen the same thing as we; thus it is that we know we haven't been > > dreaming. It is this harmony, this quality if you will, that is the sole > > basis for the only reality we can ever know. > > > > Poincaré's contemporaries .. presumed that "preselected facts" meant that > > truth is "whatever you like" and called his ideas conventionalism. ..What > > he neglected to say was that the selection of facts before you "observe" > > them is "whatever you like" only in a dualistic, subject-object > > metaphysical system! When Quality enters the picture as a third > > metaphysical entity, the preselection of facts is no longer arbitrary. The > > preselection of facts is not based on subjective, capricious "whatever you > > like" but on Quality, which is reality itself. ..To leave the impression in > > the scientific world that the source of all scientific reality is merely a > > subjective, capricious harmony is to solve problems of epistemology while > > leaving an unfinished edge at the border of metaphysics that makes the > > epistemology unacceptable. ..But we know from Phædrus' metaphysics that the > > harmony Poincaré talked about is not subjective. It is the source of > > subjects and objects and exists in an anterior relationship to them. It is > > not capricious, it is the force that opposes capriciousness; the ordering > > principle of all scientific and mathematical thought which destroys > > capriciousness, and without which no scientific thought can proceed. > > > > From chapter 29 of ZAMM: > > Man is not the source of all things, as the subjective idealists would say. > > Nor is he the passive observer of all things, as the objective idealists > > and materialists would say. The Quality which creates the world emerges as > > a relationship between man and his experience. He is a participant in the > > creation of all things. The measure of all things... > > > > How are you going to teach virtue if you teach the relativity of all > > ethical ideas? Virtue, if it implies anything at all, implies an ethical > > absolute. A person whose idea of what is proper varies from day to day can > > be admired for his broadmindedness, but not for his virtue. > > > > Lightning hits!Quality! Virtue! Dharma! That is what the Sophists were > > teaching! Not ethical relativism. Not pristine "virtue." But areté. > > Excellence. Dharma! Before the Church of Reason. Before substance. Before > > form. Before mind and matter. Before dialectic itself. Quality had been > > absolute. Those first teachers of the Western world were teaching Quality, > > and the medium they had chosen was that of rhetoric. > > > > > > ...we advanced organisms respond to our environment with an invention of > > many marvelous analogues. We invent earth and heavens, trees, stones and > > oceans, gods, music, arts, language, philosophy, engineering, civilization > > and science. We call these analogues reality. And they are reality. We > > mesmerize our children in the name of truth into knowing that they are > > reality. We throw anyone who does not accept these analogues into an insane > > asylum. But that which causes us to invent the analogues is Quality. > > Quality is the continuing stimulus which our environment puts upon us to > > create the world in which we live. All of it. Every last bit of it. > > > > Men invent responses to Quality, and among these responses is an > > understanding of what they themselves are. You know something and then the > > Quality stimulus hits and then you try to define the Quality stimulus, but > > to define it all you've got to work with is what you know. So your > > definition is made up of what you know. It's an analogue to what you > > already know. It has to be. It can't be anything else. And the mythos grows > > this way. By analogies to what is known before. The mythos is a building of > > analogues upon analogues upon analogues. These fill the collective > > consciousness of all communicating mankind. Every last bit of it. The > > Quality is the track that directs the train. > > > > > > > > > > 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 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
