On Nov 27, 2012, at 11:13 AM, david buchanan wrote:
>
> Marsha said:
>
>
> I have stated many times that I do not label 'truth' wrong, or bad, or
> "reject it." I have nothing to say about 'truth'. The idea of truth does
> not interest me. So while I concede that there is nothing inherently bad with
> the intellectual static pattern of value labeled 'truth', neither is there
> anything inherently wrong with my finding it more useful to consider objects
> of knowledge (stuff in the encyclopedia) _patterns_ rather than truths. ...
>
>
> dmb says:
>
> snip...
dmb,
Here's what I actually posted:
On Nov 26, 2012, at 5:05 PM, MarshaV wrote:
Marsha:
I think of Anthony's statement "Quality is seen as absolute" as pointing to
Dynamic Quality, or Buddhist's Ultimate Truth. As such, he is indicating what
is indeterminate, or not further analyzable, and, therefore, what exists in an
ultimate sense. It is beyond what can be conceptualized, beyond the
concept/percept horizon. I believe that is what is meant by the word
"absolute". Static patterns, or provincial truths, represent what is
analyzable and, therefore, what exists in a relative or conventional sense and
is the result of mental construction and interpretation. It is always
understood as an object of conceptual thought.
---
Anthony writes:
“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 of 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 our history and current
patterns of values. (Pirsig, 1991, p.103)”
(McWatt, Anthony,MOQ Textbook)
Marsha:
I have stated many times that I do not label 'truth' wrong, or bad, or "reject
it." I have nothing to say about 'truth'. The idea of truth does not interest
me. So while I concede that there is nothing inherently bad with the
intellectual static pattern of value labeled 'truth', neither is there anything
inherently wrong with my finding it more useful to consider objects of
knowledge (stuff in the encyclopedia) _patterns_ rather than truths. 'Static
patterns of value' represent RMP's terminology, and I think he made an
excellent choice. I have never insisted, or suggested, that anyone adopt my
position. I like the idea of knowledge being labeled 'patterns'; it is the
best representation of static quality. Using this vernacular leads one to
naturally "examine intellectual realities (patterns) the same way he examines
paintings of 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." RMP
has it just right.
___
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
