Magnus Berg (qmgb@bull.se)
Mon, 30 Mar 1998 22:53:03 +0100
Hi Donny
You wrote:
> I feel a need to coment on the Magnus-Bo-Struan war:
> I've said time and again that most people aproch Phil. w/ this "we
> are saved; you are damned" attitude. Pick a position, choose a side, take
> your favorite -ism word as a war cry, and set pikes to recieve the charge.
> How many times do I have to say it: That is not only unphilosophical it's
> undignified (in other words, some of us feel your acting like children).
> Come on, that's square one stuff and here we are, The Lila Squad!, we're
> supposed to be on square 3 or 4.
But to be philosophical and dignified we have to have some common ground,
right? I think that the common ground required to be, what I think you mean
by philosophical and dignified, is objectivity. It is objectivity that
makes it possible to rationally reason about different points of views.
I'm not really sure exactly at which point we start to drift apart.
Do you think that a common ground is required to be philosophical
and dignified? Do you think that the common ground is objectivity?
I'll go on assuming yes on both of those questions. Whistle if you
don't. :)
Here comes the break. The MoQ have abandoned objectivity and have
no common ground (with other points of views) on which to be
philosophical and dignified. I think we have yet not learned to
cope with this. Pirsig choose to write novels instead of lining up
in front of the church of reason, (oops, that triggered an immune
system bell, right?), because it's impossible to be philosophical
and dignified about the MoQ.
> Phil.'s not about reaching conclusions, finding the highest/truist
> possition, uncovering the TRUTH. (I like what Wittgenstein said: If you
> want to know the truth go study science. Science pursues truth; phil.
> pursues clarity.) It's more important to be clear that to be correct!!!!
The MoQ agrees. Truth comes with a context, the context in which it
is true.
Mostly for Struan: The MoQ does not provide absolute answers to ethical
dilemmas. It *does* however provide a framework with which to
contextualize dilemmas.
> Phil. is about exploring the wider view ("Hey, wait! What really is going
> on here?") and exploring alternative POVs, approches, and thinking about
> good questions.
Yes, and I think that this is what Pirsig already have done. The
most viable approach he could come up with was the MoQ. The Lila
Squad have also thought about some really interesting questions.
Usually, the result of such a question is a little clearer view
of some part of the MoQ.
Granted, the MoQ is not a question, it's an answer. By the way,
this "philosophy is not about getting answers, it's about thinking
about good questions" is starting to bug me a little. I saw it in
the local newspaper the other day too. Can't really tell why it's
bugging me but I'll try, keep the immune system bell handy.
It seems like philosophers think it's a virtue to formulate questions
without answers. On second thought, that should be "questions without
objective answers". They think it's fun to watch poor students on
square 1 agonize over the implications of each answer followed by a
carefully formulated answer. The philosophy professor however, knows
that there is no objective answer to the question, so he can easily
spot the flaw of the student's answer and yell: Ha, you're being
subjective! You're doing exactly the same thing when you say that
we're acting like children.
Don't get me wrong, questions are vital. They are dynamic, they
impose intellectual change. But they need answers, otherwise no
change is achieved and nothing is gained. I usually think of
objectively unanswerable questions as evidence of the limits of
objectivity.
> I want to get a cultural immune system alert. A bell maybe?
> BING!BING!BING!BING!BING!BING!BING!
> It goes off whenever this cultural immune system -- thinking about
> positions -- kicks in.
I'm looking for common grounds here, I hope it shows through. It's not
objectivity but at least we're all talking english.
Magnus
-- "I'm so full of what is right, I can't see what is good" N. Peart - Rush-- 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 - 16:42:58 CEST