From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Wed May 18 2005 - 19:21:15 BST
Hi Mike,
Just wanted to jump in here and say welcome to the group. The point
you make below is right-on, of course. Anyone who suggests
pragmatism leads to Nazism is beyond absurdity. To suggest that
Pirsig believes that pragmatism leads to Nazism is an abomination.
Just a friendly bit of advice: Before embarking on the Holden
Carousel of Faux Philosophy, you might want to jump into the archives
and review some of the proprietor's past discussions. These will
give you an idea of the dizzying ride in store for you. Here's a
link to my first post, over a year ago:
http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/8350.html
You can ride the carousel from there. Wait till you get to the
theory of "kill 'em all like germs" crime control which, it is
claimed, is fully supported by the Metaphysics of Quality. Hold onto
your hat!
Again, welcome. I've found your first few posts to be well-written
well-informed, and a pleasure to read. I'm looking forward to
reading many more.
Best,
Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
-- InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983 Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com And now for something completely different... "Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." - President Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1954 On 18 May 2005 at 16:31, Michael Hamilton wrote: Hi Platt I can't let this one go: Pirsig takes a dim view of James' pragmatism in Lila, pointing out that Nazis were pragmatic. (For similar reasons I object to postmodernists making pragmatism an object of worship.) To put it mildly, this is a gross distortion. Pirsig shows total agreement with James' axiom "Truth is a species of good", and goes on to say how the MOQ supports James' pragmatism and RESCUES him from the Nazi criticism, which runs "if the Nazis had won WW2, their beliefs (about race etc) were pragmatically successful and therefore true". MOQ pragmatism, which Pirsig claims is what James intended but could not codify, does not validate truth claims based on social pragmatic success (what others allow you to "get away with"), but on intellectual pragmatic success (in James' words, that which "proves itself to be good in the way of belief"). The ambiguity of "good" is what got James into problems. The MOQ says that the good to which truth is subordinate is intellectual and Dynamic usefulness, not social usefulness. 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 : Wed May 18 2005 - 19:48:18 BST