[MD] The difference between a Monet and a finger painting

[Krimel]

[Mark]
I may be wrong, but I believe Pirsig would answer the question of "why
survive?" by saying "because those are the demands of Quality"  I think the
point of philosophizing on this kind of thing is because science does not
provide an answer which is satisfying to the individual.  The quest is
therefore for the intellectual creation of a system which is outside the
realms of current science.  One that satisfies the intellect in other ways.

[Krimel]
I don't think that "satisfaction" is a criterion for truth. It is a happy
coincidence when knowledge makes us happy but I fear that often it is just a
sign that we are on the wrong path. I think it is true that I will die one
day but I don't find that terribly satisfying. If all you want is beliefs
that make you happy why not drop the pretext and take up painting?

Science may not be the only path to truth or knowledge but I do think that
other paths are in many ways subservient to science. One can't seriously
advance a philosophy that claims that the earth is only 10,000 years old.
Although that is the position advanced by the ICR and taught to students at
private Christian schools. I for one think inflicting these ideas on
children is a form of child abuse.