From: David Morey (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Mon May 03 2004 - 20:12:36 BST
Hi Joe
I think that truth is easy to grasp as getting
some nice and pragmatic descriptions of SQ
developed, like Newton's descriptions, but what
is the truth of the relationship between a plant and the sun?
Or the suffering of an animal? Or the poems of Rilke?
Agency and consciousness and their dependence on DQ
open up very different notions of truth. Philosophy and religion
have their poetic side, they have something to express about what
it is to be human that scientific descriptions of SQ leave out,
DQ in other words, the quality of experience in other words,
awe, love, despair, emptiness, beauty and suffering, etc.
regards
David M
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe" <jhmau@sbcglobal.net>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 3:54 AM
Subject: Re: MD Religion of the future.
> On 29 April 2004 10:52 AM David M writes to David
>
> David M
> Back to general point about 'truth' really. I state my own
> position as critical realist, i.e. I get all that post-modern
> metaphor stuff but am happy to say that a conversation with nature
> occurs, therefore we can make truth claims about what we think
> nature is telling us (even without any natural language, we sort of
> have to persuade nature to become a conversational partner in a language
> we have constructed). But I am less sure what I think about truth outside
> of the context of science. What are your views on truth?
>
> joe: I am odd man out, but I have enjoyed your exchange.
>
> IMO The organic, social, intellectual levels evolve from the inorganic
> level. Science follows the preferences of the inorganic order. It seems
to
> be reasonable to be less sure of tgruth in the other orders. They are
much
> more specific.
>
> Joe Maurer
> > regards
> > David M
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "storeyd" <storeyd@bc.edu>
> > To: "Joe" <jhmau@sbcglobal.net>; <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 3:25 AM
> > Subject: RE: MD Religion of the future.
> >
> >
> > > Hi all
> > >
> > > David M said: I have been disappointed by the overall reaction to
Sam's
> > > >ideas, seems to me that we should be promoting the MOQ for all not
> > driving
> > > >out people who bring in heavy baggage like Christianity or pragmatism
> or
> > > >whatever. Although I equally think people should not take offense at
a
> > bit
> > > >of heated argument or even abuse, but we aren't all as non-sensitive
as
> I
> > > >am.
> > >
> > >
> > > While tolerance is an indispensible attitude to productive
discussions,
> it
> > is
> > > not the ceiling of discourse, and ultimately it is a limited
> perspective.
> > > Why? Because of the same problem that plague many a postmodern
> pluralist:
> > > nonjudgmentalism. it's when the subject does not merely reserve
> judgment
> > in
> > > order to acquire a critical, multi-lateral perspective, but becomes
> > incapable
> > > of judgment, and lumps all views under a the relativistic banner of
> > pluralism,
> > > sanctioned by watchwords like sensitive, pluralistic, inclusive, etc.
> > This
> > > is, to an extent, all very good, but in the impassioned rush to
achieve
> > > inclusivity, one risks conflating and ignoring the irreconcialable
> > differences
> > > between different views; in other words, not all differences are
formal
> > > (however, much of the postmodern world believes all ideologies,
> > viewpoints,
> > > perspectives are different amalgamations of forms, signs, surfaces,
> texts,
> > > etc., that is, it does not believe in qualitatively different content
> > (which
> > > is another way of saying that it does not believe in spirit, meaning,
> > Quality,
> > > etc.) This is what happenned with Sam. Remember, Pirsig certainly
> feels
> > that
> > > some views are of a higher caliber of quality than others.
Christianity
> > > (well, what C.S. Lewis called "mere christianity", which basically
means
> > the
> > > sine qua non of the faith, meaning that the incarnation was a literal,
> > actual,
> > > historical event, the only way to God) confuses DQ with SQ, and that
> > means,
> > > according to Pirsig's metaphysics, that it is a low or limited quality
> > view,
> > > period. No buts. The truth, David M, is that Sam removed himself
from
> > the
> > > discussion, we did not drive him out. The insensitivity, you see, is
> due
> > to
> > > him, not to others who disagreed with him and tried to convince him
> > otherwise.
> > > "heavy baggage", after all, tends to weigh one down, and in general,
it
> > is a
> > > nuisance to those who sincerely wish to travel.
> > > What do you think?
> > > -Dave
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
>
>
>
> 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
>
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 : Mon May 03 2004 - 20:17:50 BST