Greetings,
Platt wrote:
" . . . . many philosophers (many of whom are Idealists to one degree or another) look
upon value
and reality as inseparable."
Precisely. I'm glad we have come to a consensus on this. The rest of the argument is
merely one of
linguistics as it matters not one jot if I prefer to label a tree as a pattern of
values or a
pattern of facts if I'm talking about the same thing whichever form I choose. By
insisting that
there is a distinction one is merely impaling oneself upon either horn of an age old
fact/value
dilemma. Your 'original statement' is therefore true linguistically, but
philosophically it is
false. You are right in saying that the philosophers I mentioned do not explicitly
state that the
world consists of patterns of value, but the metaphysical assumption is the same and
that is much
more important than the language.
To your ending rhetoric. Posterity will judge Pirsig as the greatest populariser of
philosopher this
century and also as the writer of one superb novel. Quite an accolade and an
extraordinary
achievement. Lila, by contrast, is a turgid, poorly written, depressing tale of
personal and
philosophical failure and as such was a mistake which will soon be forgotten.
Farewell.
Struan
------------------------------------------
Struan Hellier
< mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"All our best activities involve desires which are disciplined and
purified in the process."
(Iris Murdoch)
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
