Re: MD What is a fact?

• Previous message: Matt the Enraged Endorphin: "Re: MD Mysticism and the appearance/reality distinction"
• In reply to: David Buchanan: "RE: MD What is a fact?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Hi David,

> My point? We can allow that both
> societies and individuals are complex forests of static patterns. it does
> NOT follow from this complexity, however, that the top two levels are
mixed
> or fused or indistinct.

I think your argument makes logical sense, but I'm not convinced that it
marries up with "the facts". I'm still dubious about the viability of
social/intellectual as the boundary between level three and four, especially
given Pirsig's clarification of intellect as 'manipulation of symbols'. I
see language as unavoidably social - it is what holds the social level in
being - yet if that isn't 'manipulation of symbols' I don't know what is.

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

• Next message: Elizaphanian: "Re: MD What is a fact?"
• Previous message: Matt the Enraged Endorphin: "Re: MD Mysticism and the appearance/reality distinction"
• In reply to: David Buchanan: "RE: MD What is a fact?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 09 2003 - 12:56:52 BST