Greetings,
JAMIE:
>Struan:
> Like I said, I am ignorant right now of the basis for your whole
>noumena/phenomena discussion, but as I was reading your latest post, if felt
>I had to point this out: When you say that the phenomenal/noumenal dualism
>excludes Quality by definition, you may be forgetting that Quality is the
>absolute top of Pirsig's MOQ hierarchy,
We are talking about how things are perceived by human minds, not what they constitute or what
constitutes them, thus it is entirely accurate to say that either we perceive quality through the
senses, to a greater or lesser extent, or we do not. Pirsig claims we do, (radical empiricism), I
agree. This was why I wrote, "Of vital importance here is the realisation that Kant did not claim
that we actually live in both a phenomenal world and a noumenal world, rather, he claimed that we
can apply these two distinct methodological structures onto a single undivided world." Whether
Pirsig chooses to place Quality at the top of his hierarchy is neither here nor there when one is
discussing noumena and phenomena.
Struan
------------------------------------------
Struan Hellier
< mailto:struan@clara.co.uk>
"All our best activities involve desires which are disciplined and
purified in the process."
(Iris Murdoch)
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:42 BST