On Nov 6, 2011, at 2:41 PM, david buchanan wrote: > > dmb said to Matt: > Think about this way; when Pirsig gets around to the point where he is > explicitly identifying his MOQ with James's radical empiricism, with > mainstream American Pragmatism and Instrumentalism, he also thinks it's worth > mentioning Hegel in order to rule him out as saying something comparable. Why > do you suppose he felt the need to deny Hegel at that point? "The MOQ is a > continuation of the mainstream of twentieth century American philosophy, It > is a form of pragmatism, of instrumentalism, which says the test of the true > is the good. It adds that this good is not a social code or some > intellectualized Hegelian Absolute. It is direct everyday experience." (Lila > 366) > > Marsha replied: > Here's what "reason and evidence" looks like. Notice there is no exception > made for American Pragmatism. RMP (2005): "The Metaphysics of Quality is not > intended to be within any philosophic tradition, although obviously it was > not written in a vacuum. ... The Metaphysics of Quality's central idea that > the world is nothing but value is not part of any philosophic tradition that > I know of. I have proposed it because it seems to me that when you look into > it carefully it makes more sense than all the other things the world is > supposed to be composed of." (RMP, 'A Brief Summary of the MOQ') > > > dmb says: > You have interrupted a conversation and changed the subject to dispute a > claim nobody made.
Marsha: > Is that what reason and evidence looks like to you? My claim was that Pirsig > identifies the MOQ with pragmatism (while denying Hegel) and that's exactly > what Pirsig does in the supporting textual evidence, which you deleted from > your response. On top of the that your objection is irrelevant and > dishonestly manufactured, I've already addressed this baseless, bogus point > several times. Talk to Mark. He's learned how to use your malicious nonsense > as a rhetorical exercise program. But if the conversation starts with half a > sentence that's been taken out context and misconstrued (in order to have a > debate that's already been had), then I have absolutely no interest in that > conversation. > > > > 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
