> Krimel said to SA: > Have betterness as your central thought is problematic. It leaves open the
> question of worseness. In theological circles similar arguments caused > similar problems. The existence of evil has been used often as a proof for > the non-existence of God. The devout offer up all kinds of theodicies to > discount this critique but frankly they are all pretty lame. You are > seeing basically the same thing here. dmb says: Worse is just the negative face of better, so your first objection makes no sense. [Krimel] Yes, I see what you mean. We are now to understand that sometimes "betterness" means "less worseness"? As David M noted sometimes it's hard to tell when "less betterness" is lurking around the bend and everything goes from "betterness" to full on worstatude. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Will you be writing in translation our will we have to recalculate on the fly? [dmb] And I think you have the theology backwards in at least two different ways. I was recently re-reading William Barrett's "Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy" and there the author explains Heidegger's critique of Western Philosophy, which is amazingly like Pirsig's. They both take sides with the pre-Socrtatic thinkers against Plato's moves to encapsulate or intellectualize "truth". They both think Aristotle made things much, much worse than that. They both think that Western Philosophy lost something big in this developement. Heidegger's critique is of a thing called the "metaphysics of presence", which is pretty much what Pirsig means by the "metaphysics of substance". They both attack subject-object dualism as thee manifestation of this ancient metaphysical regime and they both offer a kind of Taoism as an alternative to it. (see "Heidegger's Hidden Sources".) [Krimel] If Heidegger was a Taoist I say God bless him. Pirsig stated it flat out. [dmb] So anyway, the existence of God was used to deny the reality of evil, not the other way around. [Krimel] By the time Acquinas got his dog in the fight this argument was more than two thousand years old. Aquinas offered up a theodicy; an argument specifically addressed at the ancient problem of evil. The Hebrew book of Job offers five or six of them. It's not exactly a chicken and egg situation when a host of arguements address a single question. [dmb] And the assertion of betterness does not deny worseness. Not at all. Betterness means nothing except in relation to worseness. [Krimel] ...and so it begins. I'm guessing things will get worstier before bestierness gets in a static latch. [dmb] Its a relational concept. [Krimel] I have noted that elsewhere. [dmb] This commone critique by Pirsig and Heidegger is an attack on theism and scientism, both of which use the same dualistic metaphysical assumptions, assumptions that are so completely ubiquitous in the West that alternatives are hardly available except by going East or looking among the pre-Socratics. [Krimel] Wow! So we wind up with a monism that actively strives toward good and evil, oops, "betterness" and "worseness"? Yeah, I generally set my moral compass something like that. [dmb] Somehow you've managed to convince yourself that Taosim is compatible with your scientific outlook but not with the MOQ. That is also backwards. [Krimel] I think the MoQ grows out of Taoism and my complaints have always involved the extent to which it has drifts from The Way. Static and dynamic, good and evil, light and darkness are understood as dualism united, made one, by their opposition to one another. Matter and energy come to mind... see how it works? One of the many reasons the Tao can not be defined is that while we know fairly well what was, we can never say for sure what will be. Beyond the interplay of static and dynamic the Tao te Ching recommends ways to follow a path of virtue. It is after all the book of the way of virtue. In fact it outlines how ethics can be derived from observations of the Tao at work in nature. Zen is based on the metaphysics of Taoism. And yes. Thank you, Taoism also tracks well to a scientific outlook. There's Yin and Yang for you. 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/
