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 concede that "the MOQ follows a pragmatic notion of truth...".  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."  It's not intellectual static truths, 
it is intellectual static patterns 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

Reply via email to