[MD] Kant's Motorcycle

[Case]

[Ham]
The 'TIT' concept is anathema to the MoQ as it is to Essentialism.  It
denies the ultimate reality, Quality or Essence, and flies in the face of
Pirsig's epistemology that experience defines our finite reality.  What is
absolute and immutable cannot be differentiated.  The intellect constructs
the "patterns" of what we experience from the Value (Quality?) of the
undivided primary source.

[Case]
The MoQ like James and Dewey just skip the TITs. Everything Pirsig talks
about is post TITs. This does not make it anathema just irrelevant. There is
in none of this any need to talk about absolute or immutable or
undifferentiated. These are your own flights of fantasy. Even worse is this
business of undivided primary source. There is no reason to suppose that
whatever the source is that it is still around or that there was only one or
that we have any business saying anything about it.

[Ham]
This assumes that the essence of reality is the quantum particle/waves,
vibrations, string fields, or whatever may be theorized by scientists to
explain the objective world.  All it does is extend the empirical knowledge
of relational entities ad infinitum.  Reality is not objective.  Even Pirsig
agrees with that.  You can't eliminate the subjective factor from the
dichotomy and call it reality.  Subject and object are the necessary
contingencies for experiential reality.

[Case]
To the extent that our theories and observations result in smaller and
smaller degree of rounding error, they are meaningful and useful. Taking
that rounding error and erecting a fortress of made up verbiage around it
does nothing to further our understanding it just makes us feel important.

Pirsig does not eliminate the subjective factor he says that it emerges and
is inferred from experience in the same way the objects are inferred from
experience. He would say the inverse of what you claim; that Experience is a
necessary contingency for subjects and objects.



> [Case]
> This is just Hamish jibber jabber.  

[Ham]
I cannot argue with that.

[Case]
Consensus at last!

[Ham]
My metaphysical foundation does not require a biological system.  But the
biological system requires a metaphysical source.  

[Case]
Biological systems require only an inorganic source.

[Ham]
You are a being aware.  That means you have an organic body and conscious
awareness of what you experience.  In other words, you are a creation of the
subject/object dichotomy.

[Case]
I am a being. The nature of my being is an open question.

[Ham]
There is no end to the relationships you can find, but searching them out
will get you no closer to ultimate reality than "Pi specified to 50 billion
digits." Is this your idea of metaphysical understanding?  Get serious!!

[Case]
Your fixation on the absolute and on the ultimate is misguided. I sincerely
hope there is no end to the relationships we can find. The notion that we
are in this continuum between zero and infinity is what it is all about.