From: Sam Norton (elizaphanian@kohath.wanadoo.co.uk)
Date: Wed Apr 13 2005 - 13:54:08 BST
Hi Ham,
A brief response in this thread:
> This obsession with empiricism seems to be a hang-up peculiar to Mr.
> Pirsig
> and his MOQ defenders. ....
> Empirical is a term used to distinguish knowledge gained from direct
> observation or experience [*a postoriori*] from ideas or concepts
> conceived
> intuitively [*a priori*].
I would agree that the concern to make the MoQ 'empirical from head to toe'
is a mistake. But I am doing some work on justifying precisely how and why,
so I won't pre-empt that here.
> The philosophical movement has generally contended that questions having
> to
> do with the true nature of reality, and the individual's relationship to
> it,
> are extremely important and meaningful in terms of human life. The
> investigation of such questions is therefore considered valid whether or
> not
> its results can be verified objectively. I would wish that MOQ's author
> had
> devoted more time and effort to these vital issues, and less in trying to
> convince his readers that his ontologically-deficient thesis is
> universally
> "acceptable" to the scientific elitists.
Pirsig is trying to save value from the scientists. (In just the same way as
Schleiermacher was trying to save religion from the Kantians..... <duck>)
Sam
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 13 2005 - 14:12:16 BST