[MD] Ham thinks the MOQ is a form of phenomenology

[Stephen Hannon]

Hello Mark and Ham,

[Mark]
Then Quality is a purely subjective notion for you and perhaps science
in general.
The difference between a Rembrandt and the wall behind the painting is
a purely subjective point of view with no priority.  If you conduct a
poll on this matter and
discover, statistically, that nearly 100% of those polled prefer the
painting to the wall,
does this mean the painting has intrinsic Quality beyond the subject?

[Ham]
You've lost me with the wall behind the Rembrandt.  As various estheticians
have concluded, Beauty (or Quality) in art has both objective and subjective
correlates.  One can say that a work has artistic merit on the basis
of its balance of
features,  color palette, rendering of detail, visual perspective,
etc.  These are all objective criteria.  But the appreciation of its
Beauty (Quality) is subjective.

[Steve H]
>From my understanding of Pirsig, the painting on the wall causes the
viewer to reflect on it, producing Intellectual Quality.  If it
doesn't, that person may have no preference between the wall and the
painting (although I would guess that most people would pick the
painting).  Same thing goes with music vs. random noise.

Just a thought,
Steve H

>
>
> 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/
>