Re: MD A question

[RISKYBIZ9]

JUSTIN: I got this problem from reading about interpretations of mathematics. It's called Conceptualism, and I think it poses a serious problem to the MOQ. Any help here or answers would be appreciated. Thanks. -As far as mathematics, Conceptualism states that we invent math, not discover it- it is our own modelling of reality in a way that we can intellectually understand. Math seems to fit nature so well (as per a Neo-Platonist claim) because we have designed it to do so. ROG: We keep those rare patterns that have Quality and sweep the others away.   Marco and I were saying something similar about other (non mathrematical) forms of ART JUSTIN: The same could be said of Quality. The idea of Quality can seem like it works to us now simply because Pirsig has designed the MOQ to work based off reality. With all our analogues we have built up to reality, how can we ever know we are truly seeing Quality? The problem, therefore, is the possibility that Quality does not exist in and of itself, but only as a model for our experiences. Every person will have their own definition of Quality, even w/out the analogues, because it is their own modelling of what they perceive they see because Pirsig has said it's out there. ROG: Static patterns.  Each of us is defined by our unique spectrum of patterns. We should each have our own definitions.  Maybe if we add them all up, we can get a super definition. Dynamic Quality is that from which the patterns are derived.   How can we be sure?  We can't.  We shouldn't. If the metaphor doesn't work, find another.  Better yet, drop all metaphors, at least whenever possible. Oops, gotta go. Rog