Platt Holden (pholden@worldnet.att.net)
Fri, 9 Jan 1998 08:24:17 +0100
Samual Palmer wrote:
> With respect to the questions about everything/nothing, this seems
> to be troublesome mostly because of the limitations of our language.
> The MoQ suggests that the universe itself is founded on value.
> Perhaps the issue can be resolved algebraicly, assuming that the
> contents of our universe contain equal quantities of negative and
> positive values, then the sum of all parts would equal zero. In that
> sense, it is perfectly logical to suggest than when everything is added
> up, you'll get nothing.
>
Interesting solution. However, as you point out, it rests on the assumption
that the contents of our universe contain equal quantities of negative and
positive values. It never occured to me that values could be quantified.
Informally we sometimes value things on a scale of 1 to 10, but that's
rather unalgebraic to say the least.
Also, an essential aspect of my assumption about Quality that I tried to
express in my first and second Principles was that while Quality pervades
our universe it also transcends it, putting it beyond the realm of math,
logic and rationality. Pirsig spoke of this "conceptually unknown" in his
SODV paper on page 15, and concluded by saying, "As a starting axiom I
would say, 'Things which are intellectually meaningless can nevertheless
have value.' "
I think this is where art comes in, giving us languages in music, poetry,
painting, etc. to express. even if in a small way, the transcendent aspect
of Quality. We may not be as limited as we sometimes believe.
Platt
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com 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 - 16:42:37 CEST