BO and other LS intellects;
What RMP asserts happened during the Greek period was:
"Truth won and the Good lost and that is why we today we have so little
difficulty accepting the reality of truth and so much difficulty accepting the
reality of Quality, even though there is no more agreement in one area than in
the other." (ZAMM page 371)
Characterizing change as a bipolar, black or white; TRUTH WON, good lost;
DIETETIC WON, rhetoric lost; issue misleads us from a more practical view of change.
These quotes from William James (Pragmatism ,1907) might be helpful in
re-examining this issue. [Bracketed item from added]
ìThe process here is always the same. The individual has a stock of old
opinions [SPoV] already, but he meets a new experience [DQ] that puts them to
strain....The result is an inward trouble to which his mind till then has been
a stranger, and from which he seeks to escape by modifying his previous mass
of opinions [SPoV]. He saves as much as he for in this matter of belief we are
all extreme conservatives.î
[If] This new idea is adopted as the true [good] one. It preserves the older
stock of truths [goods] with a minimum of modification, stretching them just
enough ..to admit the novelty , but conceiving that in ways as familiar as the
case leaves possible.î
These current ìstock of old opinionsî about Quality, from the 1988 Edition
Websterís Dictionary of American English, are.
1. any of the features that make something what it is: characteristic element; attribute
2. basic nature; character; kind
3. the degree of excellence which a thing possesses
4. excellence; superiority
5. [Now Rare] position, capacity, or role.
6. [Archaic] high social position b) [Now chiefly Dial] people of high social position
7. Acoustics- the property of a tone determined by it overtones; timbre
8. Logic- that characteristic of a proposition according to which it is
classified as affirmative or negative
9. Phonet- the distinctive character of a vowel sound as determined by the
resonance of the vocal cords and the shape of the aire passage above the
larynx when the sound is produced
As it stands now the Aristotelian "naming" or "truth" meanings for quality (1
& 2) are primary. These are closely followed by the "arete" or "excellence"
meanings (3 & 4). While, in general, this placement seems to supports Pirsig
claim, it cannot be interpreted so black and white as; Truth won and Good lost
and therefore Good is no more. The race is not over and Good is in second
place.
While much of the dialog in ZAMM and Lila, indeed common usage of quality,
focuses on 3 and 4 consider for the moment 1 & 2. If we follow James' model
of change; How would the MoQ preserve these older (1 & 2) definitions of
Quality with a minimum of modification, stretching them just enough.. to admit
the novelty [of the MoQ], but conceiving that in ways as familiar as the case
leaves possible.î
I proposes that the MoQ would change two words in the current first definition
of quality. Any to all and features to values making it read:
1. ALL of the VALUES that make something what it is: characteristic elementS; attributeS.
What practical difference might this make? First you get at least 13 different
meanings of value to substitute into the first definition of quality. But most
importantly you can move the excellence definition of quality into the first
position. One of the definitions of value reads:
5 that quality of a thing according to which is thought of as being more or
less desirable, useful, estimable, important, etc.; worth or degree of worth
Avoid circular references we skip quality definitions one and two and
substituting three get:
1. All of the the excellence a thing possesses make it what it is...
Or if we what to put it in more MoQ terms:
All the excellence that possesses a thing makes it what it is.
Continuing, I would gently modify Bo's contention that "SOM is MOQ's
Intellectual level" to "SOM was/is the Western world's dominate, stable,
intellectual pattern" The MoQ, a new, not so stable intellectual pattern,
challenges that dominance. It remains to be seen whether the challenge will be
successful. If it does Bo is right "EVERYTHING will change" but IMHO that
change will follow James pattern "of preserv[ing] the older stock of truths
[goods] with a minimum of modification, stretching them just enough ..to admit
the novelty" thus "no instrument reading will change because of the MOQ view."
But as Roger often says and many others suggest; "I could be wrong"
DLT
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:50 GMT