[MD] Transhumanism

[david buchanan]

Matt said to John:
When I suggested that making "humility" a philosophical assertion to be "yay or nayed," I was suggesting, just like Pirsig in ZMM, that that turns _dialectic_, that which discerns what is true or false, into the primary subject, rather than rhetoric (or, "personal composition").  Because by making a philosophical assertion, you are making the yay or naying, truth or falsity _of the assertion_  the primary object, rather than the way one behaves in the making of assertions.

dmb says:

Not to change the subject, but where did you get the idea that "rhetoric" means "personal composition"? And where did you get the idea that rhetoric can contain no philosophical assertions? As I understand it, Pirsig simply means excellent thought and speech, which I take to mean that it is right both conceptually and stylistically, in both substance and form. A well constructed joke could count as well as an essay. Rhetoric can even be used in a dialogue or debate.
I mean, why should it be restricted to any particular form? 
I suppose it's just a co-incidence that it is your favored form that counts as rhetoric, eh?
And now that you've posted this self-serving equation, does such a move pass your behavioral test? Is it humble? 

Sorry, but I don't have any serious comments or questions about humility. You already know what Nietzsche said. I think he's got a point. That virtue is more than a little dubious. 
Why does that word always make me want to smoke pot. Hmmm. Dubious.

Cough, cough, cough.

 




 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with Hotmail. 
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5