From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sun Feb 15 2004 - 16:57:53 GMT
Hi Steve,
> >> Steve:
> >> But can gears really be compared to music based on degree of
> >> reflecting
> >> Spirit? Can the Mona Lisa be compared with Beethoven's Moonlight
> >> Sonata, or
> >> The Grapes of Wrath, or fine crystal stemware, or Einstein's Theory of
> >> Relativity? I don't think so.
> >
> > Platt said: I don't see why not. Excellence is excellence regardless of
> > its physical manifestation.
>
> How would you rank them?
About even on the scale of excellence. Another words, each a 10.
> >> You might also ask, "which would you rather store jelly in?" Some
> >> things are better than others within a specific context.
Agree, if you think of contexts as the evolutionary levels of morality.
> > Platt said:The contexts I think important are Pirsig's evolutionary
> > levels. Storing jelly is a biological level good. Drinking champagne out
> > of a crystal goblets is an aesthetic level good. Higher levels always
> > trump lower levels in the moral hierarchy, though the lower levels are
> > necessary to maintain the higher.
> >
> Pretty much agree.
>
> >> Such
> >> comparisons can be made, but the postmodern claim that truth is
> >> context
> >> dependent is important.
> >
> > Platt said:Truth is a species of good whose 'context' is always the
> > intellectual level. Perhaps inadvertently you have run into the
> > postmodern paradox by asserting truth is context dependent. What
> > "context" can you cite that makes your assertion true?
>
> I don't think the statement is self-refuting. I can't think of a
> context in which the statement "truth is context dependent" is false, but
> there are countless contexts for which the statement would be a meaningless
> non sequitor. The statement "truth is context dependent" only makes sense
> in specific contexts.
In what context would the statement "truth is context dependent" not
apply? Seems to me you are claiming an absolute truth, thus contradicting
yourself.
> > Platt said:The "everything is relative" mantra is passe, having been
> > hoisted on its own petard. Postmodernism will be replaces by Valuism.
>
> The "everything is relative" mantra takes a wrong turn when it is
> thought to mean that we can't say that anything is better than anything
> else. I think that you take a wrong turn in thinking that everything can
> be ranked in a one dimensional hierarchy. I, on the other hand, think that
> some things are better than others within specific contexts, and contexts
> are limitless.
I see only four contexts--inorganic, biological, social, intellectual.
Nothing is left out.
> > Platt said: Well, in making my observations I assumed an adult
> > perspective. What you
> > say about children applies I think to adults who claim banging on
> > garbage
> > cans is high quality music. :-)
> >
>
> In your writing-off of my example you accept that truth is context
> dependent.
The context of children is biological with a smattering of lower level
social.
> It is wrong to say that the quality of Bach is universal in the way you
> suggest. You take such ideas as "Quality is the track that directs the
> train" to mean that we are all headed to the same place. The is your
> one-dimensional hierarchy of value that I deny. We are on the same track
> in the sense that we are driven toward Quality, but Quality is not the same
> for everyone. It *is* universal in that anyone with the same collection of
> analogues as you would experience music in the same way as you, but since
> no one has the exact same collection of prior experiences we will all
> experience quality differently. See below for support in ZAMM.
Yes, we are on the same track and yes Quality is not the same for
everyone. But those who know about such things place Shakespeare above
Sidney Sheldon even though Sheldon wins the popularity game hands down. If
you discount or ignore the opinion of experts, you block potential
personal discoveries that can open up new heights of delight. It helps in
climbing mountains to have an experienced guide don't you think?
Regards,
Platt
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 : Sun Feb 15 2004 - 17:18:28 GMT