Hi Matthew and Group:
Matt, thanks for expanding on your definition of truth.
MATT:
First of all, we have to distinguish between facts and theories. Facts are true
propositions about the universe. Examples are �2 + 2 = 4� (an analytic fact)
and �my desk is made of wood� (a synthetic fact).
PLATT:
So far, I follow you.
MATT:
The truth of propositions is independent of belief.
PLATT:
Facts are independent of belief? I don�t get the distinction. To say something
is �fact� is to say you believe it�s true. Belief means �confidence in the truth
of something.� Pirsig makes no distinction. Quoting William James, he
wrote: �The true is the name of whatever proves itself to be good in the way of
belief.� (Lila, Chap. 29)
MATT:
A proposition held as a belief is verified in one of two ways. If it is analytic, it
is verified by logic, for analytic facts are true by definition.
PLATT:
You�re aware I�m sure of Godel�s Theorem which proved that analytic facts
cannot be verified other than by definition, i.e., by circular logic.
MATT:
If it (a proposition) is synthetic, it is verified by sensation and perception, for
this is the way we experience existence.
PLATT:
By saying propositions are verified by logic and experience you agree with
Pirsig. He said, �The tests of truth are logical consistency, agreement with
experience and economy of explanation. (Lila, Chap. 8) The problem here is
that �agreement with experience� can be taken to mean �agreement with
facts� which is circular because it is impossible to say what a fact is without
saying it is true.
MATT:
Sensation and perception, of course, can be flawed, so we can never be
absolutely certain of the accuracy of synthetic beliefs, but there are
nevertheless facts �out there� that are independent of belief!
PLATT:
For Pirsig, truth (fact) is a �high quality set of intellectual value patterns.� You
seem to be saying there is truth �out there� independent of intellect. Is it your
�belief� that existence (reality) exists independent of human observation,
intellect and experience? Truth �outside� intellectual patterns contradicts the
MoQ.
MATT:
Theories can be neither true nor false. They are merely either useful or not
useful.
PLATT:
If you mean theories are provisional, subject to change according to new
evidence, then they are, like science says, �provisionally true.� But useful?
That sounds like pragmatism, which you confirm.
MATT:
It is only in this sense that �truth� is relative and philosophical pragmatism is
a viable position.
PLATT:
Not in my book. I agree with Pirsig: �But the Metaphysics of Quality states
that practicality is a social pattern of good. It is immoral for truth to be
subordinated to social values since that is a lower form of evolution devouring
a higher one.� (Lila, Chap. 29) I don�t think truth by consensus (pragmatism)
has much to offer, philosophically or otherwise. Maybe this is where your
distinction between belief and truth comes in, like what we believe to be true
isn�t really true but it�s useful to believe it�s true because we believe everyone
else believes it�s true.
MATT:
So, where does free will fit into this idea of truth.
PLATT:
Here you admit that you�ve presented a theory (idea) of truth which, by your
own definition of a theory �isn�t true,� merely useful.
MATT:
I believe that the self is merely a collection of predispositions and
experiences. This position logically rules out the possibility of free will in the
traditional sense for these is no entity left to exercise such �freedom.�
PLATT:
We agree you are your experiences. But to say there is no entity such as I,
you, self, human being, person, etc. doesn�t follow. In logic, a collection of
parts (predispositions and experiences) can be labeled as a whole (entity,
self, person, etc.) without creating a fallacy. The entire structure of language
is built on such a hierarchy of wholes and parts. Thus, the concept �self� is
not independent of experiences; it is what we label a collection of
experiences held by an individual to be, just as we label a collection of walls,
windows, doors, etc. a house. One of the �experiences� a self has is the
experience of free will.
The question of truth (and the reason I brought up the subject) is directly
related to the question of reality. For Pirsig, truth is an intellectual pattern (an
intellectual reality) within a larger entity called Quality. To him there are
many truths, some good, some not so good, with a good one being one that
is logical, empirical and brief. So long as one understands the inherent
weaknesses of logic, empiricism and brevity, Pirsig�s definition of a �good�
truth is about as good as it gets. The point is there�s no truth �out there.�
Just as only an individual can respond to Dynamic Quality, only an individual
can determine truth from falsehood, reality from illusion.
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
