[Ron had said] In the end I think this becomes the point and conclusion of Pirsigs aim, he improves Quality by expanding and clarifying reason. Or why else get involved. [Krimel sez back] Sup, Dude? It's been a while. I had hoped to be more clear in pointing out that the function of reason is to provide checks and balances on our fundamentally irrational nature. As you point out the Greek were early adopters are reason as technique. They are inventors of the distinction between the rational and irrational. Rational has its roots in mathematical ratio which is to say it is digital and algorithmic. They abhorred the irrational, that is, numbers that cannot be expressed in terms of ratio.
[Ron retorts briefly] When it came to Plato yes, he fell in with the Pythagoreans but Aristotle took measure as in use, as in good. Man as a taster in refference to limit and measure. Therefore it was a matter of meaning not of ratio and your next paragraph addresses this, you added: [Krimel] But it is important to note that reason as a form of thinking is not strictly speaking a function of speaking. Rather it is the result of writing. To speak is to sing. And this singing retains essential analog features that are smoothed out and lost in writing. While not the first digital people, the Greek elevated and expanded the digitization of mankind. [Ron] When we begin to associate rhetoric with reason I think we begin to get a little closer to the distinction in terms of use. The art of persuasion was no doubt given greater creedence via the use of number because it gave explanation a greater feild of precision and accuracy but we must not lose sight of the fact that these are tools of explanation and persuasion. [Krimel] However and whoever asks the question of the "good life" reason can never produce anything more than a description. While reason might point us at the moon, it has no capacity to say, "Oh, yeah, Aha! That's it." Only the irrational can give us that assurance. [Ron concluded] I also see reason as providing that aim and goal, when it asks "what does it mean?" what is it's worth to lead a "good" life? why is the moon worthy of pointing to? reasons function aims at some end it aims at a good. The only way reason can accurately make distinctions is that some ideas are better than others and if that is the case, then we can most certainly say which ideas come closest "oh yea, aha! thats closer, thats better!" than others. I'm not sure how the irrational lends assurance. When assurance is a kind of knowing or belief and the irrational is that which is devoid of meaning. ..Thanx for your time . 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
