On Sep 21, 2012, at 1:48 PM, david buchanan wrote:
>
> Marsha said to dmb:
> I find it more _useful_ to label objects of knowledge (stuff contained in an
> encyclopedia) as 'static patterns of value' ("patterns") rather than
> 'truths'. RMP selected the best word when he chose 'patterns'; it offers the
> best representation. If you think it is confusing that I go along with RMP's
> vernacular, I suggest that it is you who is confused.
>
> dmb says:
> Your inability to grasp the meaning of Pirsig's terms is on full display once
> again. In this case you are opposing terms that Pirsig equates. You are
> pitting the pragmatic truth AGAINST static patterns even though Pirsig says
> that truth IS exactly that.
Please go ahead and blather away if you need to. I am convinced that
nonsensical blathering is best you can do. This is especially true since I
have agreed that 'truth' is an _intellectual static pattern of value_, along
with justice, freedom, democracy and, trial by jury; it is an intellectual
explanation.
"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."
(MoQ Textbook)
Your inability to read is on display also. I wrote that I find it more
_useful_ to label objects of knowledge (stuff contained in an encyclopedia) as
'static patterns of value' ("patterns") rather than 'truths'. RMP selected the
best word when he chose 'patterns'; it offers the best representation. You
want to argue with what I find useful? You want to argue that I shouldn't be
allowed to prefer RMP's vernacular, rather than YOUR preference? Who do you
think you are? You're not much as far as I am concerned.
Even if you produced a letter from RMP stating that static patterns of value
and James's pragmatic truths were absolutely identical in every way, I may
still prefer to use 'static patterns of value' rather than 'truth'. But of
course you don't have such a letter. We have merely your interpretations based
on your history and preference. I am not confused to want to stick with RMP's
chosen terms. In my understanding of the MoQ there is
Quality(Dynamic/static); static quality is patterned. "Pragmatic truth"
belongs to William James. I prefer to use RMP's term 'static patterns of
value'.
So I am not pitting anything against anything. I am merely stating my
preference. That you would object to my having a preference makes me laugh.
That you would throw into the the mix some 'objectivity' red-herring only makes
me laugh harder.
Do you have a letter from RMP stating 'static patterns of value' are absolutely
identical to 'pragmatic truths'??? No? I didn't think so.
Marsha
___
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
