Magnus Berg (qmgb@bull.se)
Tue, 21 Oct 1997 12:48:36 +0100
Hi Platt,
Platt Holden wrote:
> There are several SOM paradoxes in the MOQ itself. For example, the
> quality of the rational Metaphysics of Quality cannot be proved by rational
> thought. Still, so long as we admit to being in a rational SOM mode,
> self-contradictory assertions need to be challenged. When we want to go
> beyond the SOM mode, we can drop in a poem like Maggie's "Lord of the
> Dance." (Platt's test for AI is to have one computer make sense of a poem
> written by another computer.)
>
> Magnus replied:
> Then who decides it *is* a poem in the first place? And who decides that
> the sense made of it is ok?
>
> I was hoping you would pick up on that. It goes to the heart of a huge
> platypus in intellect's logical pattern, the platypus of "who decides?" For
> instance, the scientific method depends on verification. But who verifies
> the verifier? Before you know it, you're into infinite regress.
Thanks Platt, I almost thought you were serious with your AI test.
> But, to verify the meaning or "truth" of Shakespeare's "Hamlet" or Pirsig's
> "Metaphysics of Quality" is another matter. In that case, verification
> depends not on physical measurement but on the social and intellectual
> patterns of those who have seen the play or read Lila and who are qualified
> to render a judgment based on life experience, philosophical understanding
> and educated opinion. Biological patterns, while not entirely irrelevant,
> are not as critical to the verification process as they are in science.
>
> Given that a social element is required in any verification, and given that
> a poem and the making sense thereof is not subject to scientific
> verification, the Al test I propose will necessarily require a panel of
> qualified "experts" to decide if its a poem and if the sense made of it is
> OK.. Similarly, the Lila Squad is a panel of self-appointed qualified
> experts judging the validity and value of the MoQ.
The trouble with such panels is that no matter how large it is, there
is no guarantee that you get the "right" answer. The nazi movement
before WW II is an example as good (bad) as any.
> Ultimately, the only thing that stops
> infinite regress and answers the question, "Who decides?" is one's own
> innate sense of quality. It stops when an individual human decides, "That's
> a good truth."
I fully agree. That's what we all have done with the MoQ, but as always
in a group of people, our differences shines through much clearer than
our similarities. And what fun can come from discussing similarities? ;-)
Magnus
-- post message - mailto:skwok@spark.net.hk unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:06 CEST