Hi Jeremy:
You wrote:
> I don't think Reality is dead, I think the monistic view of Reality is
> dead. The monistic view usually holds to the idea that Reality is far
> beyond us. Remember the example Pirsig used where Poincare explained
> Reality is not a thing only a few highly trained mathematicians can know
> about? It is a thing, here, now.
Thanks for clarifying what is meant by the monistic view of reality. I got
a copy of Stephen Hawking's new book as a Christmas present, "The
Universe in a Nutshell," which proves that the idea of reality, at least as
seen by Hawking, is far beyond the ability of the average person to
comprehend (if I can take myself to be average). So I'm not convinced
that the monistic view is dead.
> Assuredly, you are familiar with the question 'what is Reality?' An ever
> more fundamental question, I believe, is what does Reality do? That is,
> what does Reality do for us? The only practical answer I can give is that
> Reality acts as a guide for future experience. That, I believe, is the
> sole significance of Reality.
>
> Another question I'm sure you're familiar with is 'What is true?' Again, by
> shifting the emphasis from a need to explain all things that are true, to a
> question of how the idea of truth is valuable to us, we arrive at a place
> of ever more fundamental importance. What does truth do? The answer James
> gave is that Truth provides a marriage -function between the previous
> Reality we used and new facts that come to light. Truth conserves a lot of
> our old assumptions but must, as well, provide a link to new experiences.
> Truth, is that which works in this sense. Thus, Truth and Reality
> intertwine.
No doubt that truth and reality intertwine. Except for some
postmodernists and Buba Clinton who wondered what the definition of
"is" is, most people accept the correspondence theory of truth where
maps match "real" territories. The neat thing about the MOQ is that it
gives us a new map (and IMO a much better map) to the territories of
our experience.
If I understand your comments about Reality and Truth you are relying
on the philosophy of pragmatism which Pirsig says is primarily a
biological/social level value. He says the Nazis can be considered
pragmatists. Do you agree with his assessment?
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:47 BST