[MD] Platt's Proverbs On Beauty

[John Carl]

Matt, Platt, Arlo and all,

I'm kind of excited about this topic because I found my Kukilck's
Intellectual History of Josiah Royce yesterday (Its been missing for a few
weeks) and jumped to the chapters on logic that I wanted to share with
Magnus.

What Royce was attempting was the resolution of the logical bridge between
the World of Description and the World of Appreciation, a way of deducing
the Kantian categories - Royce's Holy Grail - mostly based upon the work of
one Alfred Bray Kempe.

And high falutin' logicians are mostly beyond my pale, but at least now I
know where Joe gets his attachment to his octave-oriented reality.  He's a
Boolean, after all.

And now I'm getting pretty motivated to finish that dense and difficualt,
World and Individual to get some vocabulary under my belt to help me
untangle Appreciation and Description.

Sigh.  So much philosophy, so little. time.

John

On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Matt Kundert
<pirsigaffliction at hotmail.com>wrote:

>
> Well, wait a second--what I've always taken Platt to be
> enunciating is the very real sense in Pirsig of what the mystic
> traditions articulate most explicitly: that language points
> away from reality (e.g., the menu analogy).  If we bear
> that one in mind, and read Platt, then I don't think it's a
> very far jump to read "intellect" as "language" and
> "beauty" as "reality/Quality."
>
> Platt's thesis has long been something like "beauty is reality,"
> based on an extension of the Quality thesis.  And with the
> idea of "Dynamic Quality [better reality--i.e. more beautiful]
> is the pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality," I think we
> can begin to see much better how Platt stands on Pirsig's
> shoulders.
>
> I think Steve's suspicion is right.  I think Arlo's
> counter-evidence is also right, but I think this is a conflict
> within Pirsig.
>
> Matt
>
> > Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 13:15:30 -0500
> > From: peterson.steve at gmail.com
> > To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> > Subject: Re: [MD] Platt's Proverbs On Beauty
> >
> > Hi Arlo,m
> >
> > Thanks, that makes sense.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:
> > > [Steve]
> > > I was thinking the same thing when I read Platt's post, but I wonder if
> > > Platt's take on intellect polluting beauty is consistent with some of
> > > Pirsig's writings nevertheless.
> > >
> > > [Arlo]
> > > Only if Platt had said "S/O Intellect is blind to 'beauty'". If you go
> back
> > > to ZMM, I'm sure you can even stretch that complaint to include
> "pollute",
> > > but only with the S/O qualifier (pun intended). But "intellect"
> > > in-and-of-itself? Nope. Intellect is Pirsig's highest order of static
> value.
> > > I doubt Pirsig would ever say that "calculus" or "quantum physics"
> pollutes
> > > beauty, indeed he'd probably say these, like symphonies, can be very
> > > beautiful indeed. In fact, it was "intellect" in ZMM that Pirsig was
> trying
> > > to show  has been blinded by S/O perspectives, but that once those are
> > > removed, intellect (the assembly of rotisseries) can and SHOULD be an
> art
> > > form of the highest order.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>