RE: MD The individual in the MOQ

From: Paul Turner (paul@turnerbc.co.uk)
Date: Fri Aug 20 2004 - 15:23:11 BST

  • Next message: Mark Steven Heyman: "Re: MD Fox News and Logical Analysis"

    Hi Platt

    Platt said:
    As I suggested, if he were to use "Quality event" as the starting point
    of the MOQ, then positioning his examples, like the hot stove anecdote,
    as a "low Quality" event might make it easier for readers to relate to
    his overall philosophy.

    Paul:
    Perhaps, but I think he emphasises that Quality events *are* experience
    because he wants the MOQ to be accepted as an empirical system and to
    distance it from supernatural or ethereal connotations and thus defend
    his system from the usual logical positivist attack. This is a recurring
    theme in his correspondence since LILA, e.g. his response to Ham's
    Essentialism:

    "My problem with "essence" is not that it isn't there or that it is not
    the same as Quality. It is that positivists usually deny "essence" as
    something like "God" or "the absolute" and dismiss it experimentally
    unverifiable, which is to say they think you are some kind of religious
    nut."

    Platt said:
    All I'm suggesting is that the MOQ would "sell" more easily if its basic
    assumption was phrased differently.

    Paul:
    Perhaps you're right, although I don't know how easy it is to "sell"
    metaphysics in any case.

    Platt said:
    Of course, I could be wrong. But isn't one of the purposes of MOQ
    discuss to suggest possible improvements to the MOQ?

    Paul:
    Yes.

    Platt said:
    I think it would be better if Pirsig had come right out and said, "My
    initial assumption for my metaphysics is that reality is moral, created
    and sustained by Quality events."

    Paul:
    Then the question is, "What is a Quality event?" The answer then
    involves the term, "experience," and we are back where we started.
    Interestingly, in LILA'S CHILD (Q&A Section about Note 61), Pirsig talks
    about the term, "Quality event," and why he avoided using it in LILA:

    "The term "Quality Event" has created some problems. It was first used
    in ZMM to distinguish quality from a subject or an object. However many
    readers seemed to consider an event to be itself an object. This of
    course makes Quality one of a class of objects, and destroys the whole
    purpose of the MOQ. That is why you don't see the term "Quality Event"
    at all in Lila. (Or if you do, it's an overlooked bug.)"

    Regards

    Paul

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    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 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 20 2004 - 15:24:43 BST