that was a sound and well worded reply, Platt, and i thank you, but i
can't accept that either. The flaw in your argument, for me, lies in the
foundation of the stated syllologism (i just wanted to throw something
of aristotle's into a discussion of pirsig for the irony).
> First, Quality = Reality
this is the heart and soul, the scaffolding and foundation of your
argument. And i can't agree with it. Pirsig got Q to equal reality by
first accepting Q to be something that was niether objective or
SUBJECTIVE and hence transcended them both (so that Q could eventually
equal reality). You cant just take Q=R to be a tautological statement to
just throw around. you must prove it. your assumption that pirsig had
already proven it for this argument's sake was flawed because pirsig's
proof required Q to not be 'just' subjective. And that is what this
argument is about.
> To put an answer to your question in a nutshell: Quality is reality, > and as we all know, reality is NOT whatever we wish.
though it may be true that "reality is NOT whatever we wish" it is not
necassarily true in this argument that "Quality is reality".
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:45 BST