From: Erin N. (enoonan@kent.edu)
Date: Sun Feb 02 2003 - 00:09:01 GMT
>Erin,
>> Look at your language Platt lol... if truth is
>> always personal and relative.
>> Where was that said? As usual by nobody but you.
>
>So sometimes truth is absolute?
It's not that truth is or isn't absolute to me.
It's about whether I can know if it is absolute.
That doctor/germ quote is a good example. I didn't
think of an example of where it was not true but
I didn't think of it as an absolute just because
I couldn't think of one. Then Jon gave an example
in which it wouldn't necessarily be true.
Ta da...
So considering the possibility that i can't think
of every possible situation then I don't claim
anything as absolute even though I think its
possible to be an absolute.
>> All the strong language you give are about the ideas within the MOQ
>> but where does he use strong language about the MOQ in its entirity.
>
>So the ideas in the MoQ are strong but the MoQ isn't?
At this time it is strong for me but I hold the
possibility that it won't in the future if a better
explanation comes along so that is why I don't consider
it absolute.
>> >In any event, I had to smile at your implication that it would be
>> >absolutely wrong to argue that Pirsig misinterpreted Pirsig. Or is that a
>> >"provisional" judgment on your part? :-)
>>
>> Again you have to add words like "absolutely
>> wrong" to other people's statements.
>> Notice its only you who likes writing in this
>> manner.
>
>Pirsig writes in this manner at times.
Yes he writes in all different manners with all the
different characters. You should try a little creative
writing, taking other people's perspective might
be a good exercise for you;-)
>> Can you consider the possibility that
>> Pirsig slightly EXAGERATES all three characters
>> to make them clearly representative of the level
>> they are supposed to.
>> I don't think Pirsig ever suggests to take
>> MoQ in the absolute sense.
>> Is it possible that Phaedrus
>> could be representative of Pirsig's opinion
>> of MOQ at a particular point in his life but
>> changed his mind and wrote in retrospect.
>> So many possibilities that I can't just can't
>> accept your opinion as Pirsig's.
>> I even consider the terrifying thought that
>> Pirsig does suffer delusions of grandeur like
>> you and thinks that he can't be wrong (but
>> that usually doesn't last long thank god).
>
>Yes, I'm sure Pirsig would admit he could be wrong. I've admitted it
>many times on this site. I trust you'll admit the same regarding your
>own views.
>
Platt
No I never never never can be wrong. That is
one thing I am absolutely positively certain
of lol. Yes ** I ** know that, that's why
I don't attach the a-word to my opinions.
The only thing is I wished I understood
3dwavedaves analogy of architecture when we
were going around in circles about this
at a previous time. I don't feel like I fully got what he was
trying to say but it seemed like some midpoint.
Erin
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 2.1.5 : Sun Feb 02 2003 - 00:01:10 GMT