In my humble opinion, American Pragmatism can be made better by replacing 
'truth' with inorganic, biological, social and intellectual static patterns of 
value.  



On Dec 3, 2012, at 2:22 AM, MarshaV wrote:

> 
> "... A primary occupation of every level of evolution seems to be offering 
> freedom to lower levels of evolution. But as the higher level gets more 
> sophisticated it goes off on purposes of its own. Once this independent 
> nature of the levels of static patterns of value is understood a lot of 
> puzzles get solved. The first one is the usual puzzle of value itself. In a 
> subject-object metaphysics, value has always been the most vague and 
> ambiguous of terms. What is it? When you say the world is composed of nothing 
> but value, what are you talking about? 
> 
> "Phaedrus thought this was why no one before had ever seemed to have come up 
> with the idea that the world is primarily value. The word is too vague. The 
> 'value' that holds a glass of water together and the 'value' that holds a 
> nation together are obviously not the same thing. Therefore to say that the 
> world is nothing but value is just confusing, not clarifying. 
> 
> "Now this vagueness is removed by sorting out values according to levels of 
> evolution. The value that holds a glass of water together is an inorganic 
> pattern of value. The value that holds a nation together is a social pattern 
> of value. They are completely different from each other because they are at 
> different evolutionary levels. And they are completely different from the 
> biological pattern that can cause the most sceptical of intellectuals to leap 
> from a hot stove. These patterns have nothing in common except the historic 
> evolutionary process that created all of them. But that process is a process 
> of value evolution. Therefore the name 'static pattern of values' applies to 
> all."
>    (RMP, 'LILA', Chapter 12)
> 
> 
> Marsha:
> Yes: "Therefore the name 'static pattern of values' applies to all."  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.).  
> 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