[MD] The Edge 2006 Annual Question

[Scott Roberts]

Ian,

Ian said:
As you know, my problem was not with the word salvation per se, but
with your introduction of it out of left field without any explantory
pre-amble (as I said). Anyway ...

Scott:
Here is where it was introduced (on Feb 3):

"Ian said:
My point was to agree and move on.
What was yours ?

"Scott:
To clarify the disagreement. That is because I consider physicalism to be
fundamentally wrong, that it is a hindrance to the larger purpose of
salvation (e.g., Awakening)."

I do not consider that to be "out of left field without any explanatory 
pre-amble".

Ian said:
It seems you're not so much abandoning physicalism as claiming to
abandon the need for explanation. That's more significant (to me).
Like, you're spending roughly 10x as many words in this thread
explaning your position as I am - which is ironic.

Scott:
Explanation has its place, including trying to explain where I am coming 
from. That it takes 10x as many words is because, while I am more or less 
familiar with where you are coming from, it seems that you are not familiar 
with where I am coming from. It is new to you, so it takes more time to 
explain.

Ian said:
I too question what makes a good explanation (closely related to
questions of causality too), but I don't say we can abandon them - I
say we work 'em out better. This has nothing to do with physicalism.

Scott:
As I said, I am not saying one abandons explanation in toto. When I said one 
questions explanation, I am referring to the post-Nietzschean trend that 
questions the Emlightenment project of seeing metaphysical progress as being 
a matter of finding ever more detailed and more complete explanations of 
reality. Not all language games have explanation as their primary purpose. I 
am working on seeing metaphysics as not being primarily about finding the 
best model of reality, but as being primarily soteriological.

But going back to the original "explanation" issue: Pirsig says that Quality 
is not something to be explained. Do you agree?

- Scott