Ron, inserted below ...
On 5/8/07, Ron Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> \
> >[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".
[IG] Sorry Ron, not sure where to start there, other than to take your
word for it. I have to say "I doubt it"
> 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".
[IG] Sorry again Ron, but I doubt it - "true / false logic on a firm
foundation of nothingness" ? Where's the drivel fairy when I need him
?
> 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".
[IG] Not sure about the Wilbur take, but to me the omega point is the
last sip of brandy after a last supper in the restaurant at the end of
the universe - the very end - hopefully before the waiter arrives with
the check. To me "ends" are pragmatic things achieved. The Pirsig view
- evolution - reality as self-organising complex systems - is so much
more here and now - real.
Regards
Ian
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/
