Diana McPartlin (diana@asiantravel.com)
Wed, 11 Feb 1998 10:31:59 +0100
Hi Keith and squad
Keith A. Gillette wrote:
> Whew! OK, after looking at the SOM problems Pirsig points out, I can't
> say
> that any of them alone make very good examples to use in explaining MoQ.
> It's all of these little things taken taken together that make the case.
Thanks for posting all that. I think you covered all the main objections
to the MOQ (and the main problems with these objections;-). As you said,
a lot of it depends on how predisposed the person you're trying to
explain it to is to discussing things like "causation". Unfortunately
most people aren't very interested at all.
I started writing my own objections to the SOM but it has turned into a
rather long essay so it may take a while.
In the meantime while we're on the subject of trying to explain the
MoQ, another thing I've always found difficult is trying to explain
exactly what "value" is. Yes we all know that value is what creates
subjects and objects and all that, but that's a really abstract concept
for people to grasp, especially if they've never considered the problem
of causation before. When Pirsig explains it to Lila in the book, he
says it's "likes and dislikes", but it sounds crazy if you tell people
the basic building block of the universe is "likes and dislikes".
>
> P.S. Is it just me or is GeoCities PAINFULLY s l o w ?
>
Yes, I know it's slow and recently they've started throwing up an ad
screen in your face every time you go there. I've tried to keep the
graphics down but I can't do much else about it. The big advantage is
that it's free obviously, but if it's really annoying then we could move
somewhere else. What does everyone else think?
Diana
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:47 CEST