[SA previously]
> > Where do you find this information? I
> learned mine in the university by people who study
science
> > called philosophers, and they openly discuss what
> > science is and how they say what science is, they
> call logical positivism. Where did you learn what
you say above?
[Platt]
> >From Pirsig who was first to identify SOM.
Where does Pirsig say SOM is locked into science,
that science can't have a different mindset, a
different approach? I'm reading how anthropology with
a Boas logical positivist mindset left out values, and
Pirsig states how this cultural immune system where
the science called anthropology is weakest and can be
changed. Pirsig goes on to discuss how some
anthropologists have notice values need to be used to
understand what anthropologist study. It is the
approach these scientists can change. A different
mindset. Pirsig says he can usurp this Boas approach
with a different approach since Pirsig once wrote a
book about values of for values are quality, and
Pirsig thought, in Lila, he would be best to handle
this change. This was the same objectivity that
Dusenberry disliked about mainstream anthropologists.
Lila; ch. 4 and 5
> [Platt]
> Science rejects thought? That's a new on on me. I
> wonder how many scientists would agree.
I talked with an astronomy professor while I was
at the university, and tried to talk about how culture
can be scientific. She kept saying science can't
support culture or thought. Science has to be
objective. And here we find the separation between
mind-body, body-spirit, etc... where body can't be
anywhere connected with spirit - it's called SOM where
subject is separated from object. Subject can't be
bias, must be completely objective to know facts.
Subject can't involve itself in the facts. The
subject must be impartial, and realize that all the
subject can do is speculate and not really know
anything worthwhile and truthful. Thoughts taint and
infect ones view with corrupt non-objectivity. That's
SOM. So, notice the MOQ with its' talk of values on
the inorganic level as well as intellectual level.
Value is found on each level.
> > [SA previously]
> > I thought you didn't know what I meant, and
> here you mention polar opposites. Hmmm... Where
does
> the MOQ mention death vs. life?
[Platt]
> Inorganic vs. biological levels.
Inorganic vs. biological levels, ok, your
avoiding my questions. Where does the MOQ mention
death vs. life?
[Platt]
> I know what polar opposites mean. I don't know what
> "perspectives
> not exclusives" means. Perhaps you can explain.
Exclusive means this here and that there. Strong
here and weak there. A black and white world with no
gray. That's what exclusive means.
[Platt]
> MOQ is opposed to the SOM mindset of science.
SOM has a much longer history than just science.
SOM thought up science. It is now found to be too
rigid of a philosophy to explain what what many have
been sweeping under the rug. The MOQ enhances SOM
with a more encompassing perspective. Don't be rigid
about science. It has been the philosophy called SOM
that has been leading science. The MOQ can help
science understand more of the data science has found.
[SA quoted Lila]
> > "Of course, the ultimate Quality isn't a noun or
> an adjective or anything else definable..." [Lila;
> last chapter: last paragraph]
[Platt]
> Pirsig spent the majority of an entire book
explaining the MOQ.
> Sometimes I wonder if you read Lila.
"...ultimate Quality isn't... definable..." What
is Quality? That can be answered staticly, but don't
forget about dynamic quality which leaves the question
still ultimately unanswered/undefined.
> > [Platt]
> Unexplainable? Didn't you read Lila? DQ, "the source
> of all things, the moral
> force that had motivated the brujo in Zuni." Doesn't
> that sound like an
> explanation to you? It does to me. At lot more than
> "It emerged."
Sure you can explain quality on the intellectual
level - the static level. What of dynamic quality?
DQ is the source of all things, but what is that
source? DQ, and this moral force that had motivated?
What is this Dq? Read the menu, but can't eat the
menu, right? All is analogue of dq, but dq can't be a
static pattern of value - that's static quality.
woods,
SA
___________________________________________________________________________________
You snooze, you lose. Get messages ASAP with AutoCheck
in the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_html.html
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/
