Hi Struan, rv and Group:
STRUAN:
So Pirsig tells us that it is a choice to follow dq. Simply repeating it again
doesn�t make it right.
PLATT:
Glad to get your agreement on what Pirsig said. The point of my post was to
clarify Pirsig�s description of the MoQ, not whether he was right or wrong. As
others have cautioned, let�s agree on what Pirsig actually says before
critiquing him.
Regarding the Bertrand Russell quote, you can read it any way you want.
Your attempt to interpret it as meaning something other than what he says
failed to persuade me.
STRUAN:
Quantum physics has not changed the most appropriate word from �cause�
to �prefer� this is absolute nonsense.
PLATT:
You may think it�s nonsense, and most physicists make think it�s nonsense,
but within the context of the MoQ it makes perfect sense. The quotations
you cited from Stephen Hawking and Steve Adams simply reassert the
metaphysical view of determinism held by the majority in the scientific
establishment. But, so what? As Pirsig points out: �You can always
substitute �B values precondition A� for �A causes B� without changing any
facts of science at all.� (Lila, Chap. 8)
STRUAN:
The scientific view is that non-deterministic systems evolve out of underlying
deterministic processes. Furthermore, if they are not observed they behave
deterministically. Of course, there is no empirical evidence for this but it has
been proved mathematically with Schrodingers equation . . .
PLATT:
You gotta love it. Science down on its knees, reverting to a religious-like faith
in determinism and praying that it�s right. Whether Schrodingers equation
�proves� it or not I leave to rv who knows much more about higher
mathematics than me. But it shouldn�t be forgotten that math, too, is faith-
based. As someone once said, �If religion is defined as truths that cannot be
proved, then math is the only religion that can prove it�s a religion.� (Godel�s
Theorem)
RV:
As far as I know there is no theories that dare burden an electron or an atom
with such thing as free will . . .
PLATT:
First of all, a warm welcome to the discussion. As for electrons having free
will, may I refer you to the theory of panexperientalism that claims that
mentality and physicality are two aspects of the same phenomenon,
espoused by such credible authorities (take note Struan) as philosopher A.
N. Whitehead (one of Pirsig�s mentors), zoologist W.E. Agar, and biologists
C.H. Waddington, Sewall Wright and Charles Birch among others. The
theory attempts to answer the question, �How can mind arise from no mind?�
and posits that experience is relevant at all levels, from protons to people.
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
