Marsha, You are really chomping at the bit! Give it a rest. Mark
On Nov 21, 2011, at 2:07 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi dmb, > > PLEASE SUPPLY THE SOURCE FOR THE DEFINITION OF RELATIVISM (the one in the > nutshell) YOU SUPPLIED: > > Relativism is the view that truth is relative to the culture or the > individual, that there is no way to say that one truth is better than another. > > > > On Nov 21, 2011, at 3:59 PM, david buchanan wrote: > >> Calling Pirsig a relativist is not only philosophically incorrect and >> inconsistent with the drama of the story, it's also kind of insulting. > > > Marsha: > I have said I understand the MoQ to be epistemologically relativistic. You > keep conflating cultural relativism and epistemological relativism. The > quotes in Lila concerning the anthropologists are clearly about cultural > relativism. And you have not supplied the source for the definition you > provided. > > Here is a standard (sourced) definition of relativism: > > > noun Philosophy . > any theory holding that criteria of judgment are relative, varying with > individuals and their environments. > > (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/relativism) > > Please note that it does not preclude judging which of competing truths may > be better. > > > > From LILA: > > “…if Quality or excellence is seen as the ultimate reality then it becomes > possible for more than one set of truths to exist. Then one doesn't seek the > absolute Truth.' One seeks instead the highest quality intellectual > explanation of things with the knowledge that if the past is any guide to the > future this explanation must be taken provisionally; as useful until > something better comes along. One can then examine intellectual realities the > same way one examines paintings in an art gallery, not with an effort to find > out which one is the 'real' painting, but simply to enjoy and keep those that > are of value. There are many sets of intellectual reality in existence and we > can perceive some to have more quality than others, but that we do so is, in > part, the result of our history and current patterns of values. > > (LILA, Chapter 8) > > Since you ignored my last post on the subject, I will repeat: > > Anthony: > “Intellectual values include truth, justice, freedom, democracy and, trial by > jury. It’s worth noting that the MOQ follows a pragmatic notion of truth so > truth is seen as relative in his system while Quality is seen as absolute. > In consequence, the truth is defined as the highest quality intellectual > explanation at a given time." > > RMP: > If the past is any guide to the future this explanation must be taken > provisionally; as useful until something better comes along. One can then > examine intellectual realities the same way he examines paintings in an art > gallery, not with an effort to find out which one is the ‘real’ painting, but > simply to enjoy and keep those that are of value. There are many sets of > intellectual reality in existence and we can perceive some to have more > quality than others, but that we do so is, in part, the result of our history > and current patterns of values. (Pirsig, 1991, p.103)” > > (McWatt,Anthony, 'AN INTRODUCTION TO ROBERT PIRSIG’S METAPHYSICS OF > QUALITY' 2005, p.147) > > Marsha: > The Buddhist have long recognized conventional truth as relative: > > "The Buddhist doctrine of the two truths differentiates between two levels of > truth (Sanskrit: satya) in Buddhist discourse: a "relative" or commonsense > truth (Pāli: sammuti sacca), and an "ultimate" or absolute, spiritual truth > (Pāli: paramattha sacca)." > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_truths) > > > Marsha: > And the correlation between conventional truth and static quality has been > duly noted by Anthony: > > "‘Static quality’ refers to anything that can be conceptualised and is a > synonym for the conditioned in Buddhist philosophy." > > (McWatt, Anthony,'AN INTRODUCTION TO ROBERT PIRSIG’S METAPHYSICS OF > QUALITY', 2005, p.29) > > > Marsha: > Dmb presented this Granger quote: > > "Socrates recognizes the potential force of sophistical rhetoric, and he is > concerned that if the goal of rhetoric is simply to persuade people about a > certain vision of 'the good', it might be used to appeal to the emotions > instead of to reason - in a manner that will lead the polis away from 'true > knowledge', rather than toward it. The most powerful element in society would > then be free to control the way the good is defined and embodied in that > society's laws. In short, the sophist's rhetoric could be used to promote the > most robust and destructive sort of relativism, one where the good is > determined by little more than the accidents of power and convention. > Socrates thus finds it necessary to silence Gorgias in short order and, as > 'Phaedrus' saw it, turn Gorgias's rhetorical art into an object that he can > then cut to pieces with his well-honed analytic knife." > (David Granger, "John Dewey, Robert Pirsig and the Art of Living", 46) > > > Marsha: > PLEASE NOTE: Granger doesn't condemn all relativism, he only rejects a > "destructive sort of relativism". And Plato's presentation of relativism, by > Socrates, was very useful in promoting his (Plato's) own philosophy. Within > the MoQ, the Good may be determined by placement on the four-level pattern > structure. There are many types of relativism, and multiple arguments for > and against this perspective,that, in turn, touches many philosophical > disciplines. To conflate multiple types is a very narrow, static method to > protect your man James where common understanding has him: > > “It was classic William James, imbued with a sense of the relativism of all > knowledge, a respect for and curiosity about alternative perspectives, an > instinct to analyze clearly and thoroughly but to develop a synthesis > wherever possible, and a conviction that the truth of any idea or thing is > best understood by observing its action in the world. > > > (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/masterpiece/americancollection/american/genius/william_bio.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
