hello everyone, I agree to most things said this month but I would like to add some details. Talking of SOM I not only think of positivism (what I see as the major cause of the mind-matter split) but also of logic. The basic rules of logic were thought out by Aristotelis (how do you spell his name in english?) as an attack against Heraclites. It is Aristotelis who in turn is attacked by Pheadrus at the end of ZMM. I won't point out the argumentation against these rules (an other time) but it is very simular to Pirsigs attack on SOM since these rules are the fundament of SOM. Althought no serious thinker will adhere to SOM (including logic and positivism !!!) completely nowadays, every thinker in the european tradition somewhere depends on logics according Aristotelis. There are many philosophers who were so close to the consept of MOQ but always somehow SOM sneaked in through the backdoor. For instance both psychoanalysis and the Frankfurter schule had levels and dynamic components but stuck because it seemed to dangerous to leave SOM. The major problem, as I see it, is that most philosophers and scientists but also the 'common' man knows that SOM does only work under very specific conditions but they are not aware of it. They should be aware when they use a SOM argumentation. A secund problem is that most people who are not an academic philosopher know very few or even no alternatif argumentations. To end with I think the 'common' people know very well that mind can influence matter. Look at the fast growing New-Age-thing and see even 'common' housewives believing something of it this you can't say that the 'common' man thinks S/O. greetings, Jaap MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
