\
>[Ian]
Not sure exactly what the label "Scientism" means Krimel, but I find
myself agreeing with Ham and Platt.
I'm not defending Ham's essentialism, but a metaphysics is not
"testable" in the falsifiable "scientific method" sense but is
indirectly testable by its fit with everything else observable, and all
manner of related inductive and deductive reasoning.
{Ron]
But that is actuallly what is happening with the concept of negation
and Wilburs
Ontology, that through falsability they arrive at a explaination of the
workings of "source".
Pirsig takes value down to "dynamic quality" an lets it go. Wilbur and
the like take
it one step further and use true/false logic to set it on the firm
foundation of "nothingness".
I think this is where Krimmel battles.
Pirsigs take on "betterness" seems to be an extension of the theory
Of "molecular self assembley", rather than a means to an end or an
"omega point".
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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
