Geeze Marsha, A definition of relativism that uses the word relative? No, that must be wrong. What does relative have to do with relativism?
The definition of definition is that which defines. But what defines that which defines? Is there a master definer in the house?! I need a doctor definer to fix my definition! Call the definitional Ambulance to take us to the definition hospital, my definer was broken by a definition. And, I have got money coming out of the Wazu! By the way, what kind of units do you use to measure your truth? When you compare truths, what aspects of truth are you using for the comparison? Is the truth about tooth decay relative to the truth about tooth faries? Do you put these in some kind of heirarchy of Truths? It is kind of like a "man on top of the mountain" game? Is it part of the dog-eat-dog Truth Reality? My truth is better than your truth Nah, Nanah, Nanah, Nah!! I'll put my truth against your truth any day! So, all truth is relative, but relative to what? What makes a truth? Truthfully speaking, Mark On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:28 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Greetings, > > > 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) > > Marsha: > I have said I understand the MoQ to be epistemologically relativistic. Here > RMP talks about multiple truths: > > 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) > > --- > > Marsha: > The MoQ Textbooks states clearly that truth within the MoQ is relative. > > 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 truth: > > "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) > > --- > > To fall to Academia's jargonistic prejudices is going against the MoQ grain. > And note the plain-spoken definition of William James recognizes William > James as a relativist in the most positive sense. > > “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) > > > Marsha: > The best way to understand truth within the MoQ is use the metaphor of > nonlocality, where static quality exists in stable patterns relative to other > patterns, with individual patterns having no independent existence. > > > > > > > ___ > > > 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
