Re: MF Discussion Topic for January 2004

From: MATTHEW PAUL KUNDERT (mpkundert@students.wisc.edu)
Date: Mon Jan 12 2004 - 18:09:58 GMT

  • Next message: David MOREY: "Re: MF Discussion Topic for January 2004"

    DMB,

    I believe you've missed the point of the reading I gave of that section. I
    was making a distinction between adding a sense of value and redescribing
    the senses in terms of value. It doesn't make sense at all to say that
    there is an additional, sixth sense for value _and_ all the other five
    senses are encapsulated by it. To say that this does make sense is to make
    a distinction between two uses of "value," which I also pointed out. If you
    make this distinction and insist that there is an additional "sense of
    value" analogous to the other five senses, I would imagine we would be able
    to find it in our brains, ala the other five senses.

    You imply that I'm importing some kind of physicalism, but I doubt it. Does
    not the MoQ acknowledge the existence of inorganic and biological patterns
    of Quality? Sure it does. All I'm talking about is, if a sense of value is
    analogous to the other five senses, then it should appear as a biological
    pattern of value, i.e. we should be able to find it in our brains.

    I think a close reading of the text that is at issue supports what I wrote.
    And, as is apparent, I'm all for reading Pirsig as redescribing the world,
    using value in its redescriptive sense. I think this fundamental to
    Pirsig's point. I'm not at all sure what saying that there is an additional
    "sense of value" does for Pirsig's philosophy and I'm not at all sure that
    denying it means that I'm saying that morals aren't real, like the SOMists
    say. As you say, "Morals are values of a different kind." But, if we take
    a "sense of value" to be analogous to the other five senses, then, again, we
    should be able to find a biological pattern that is attuned to morals, much
    like our eyes, ears, and skin are attuned to rocks.

    I don't think we are going to, nor do I think we need to for Pirsig's
    philosophy to make its important points.

    I don't think we are at all at odds on this reading of the text, not, at
    least, from what you wrote in reply.

    Matt

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_focus/
    MF Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/mf/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jan 13 2004 - 04:28:17 GMT