[MD] Heads or tails?

[Ron Kulp]

\
>[Ian]

Not sure exactly what the label "Scientism" means Krimel, but I find
myself agreeing with Ham and Platt.

I'm not defending Ham's essentialism, but a metaphysics is not
"testable" in the falsifiable "scientific method" sense but is
indirectly testable by its fit with everything else observable, and all
manner of related inductive and deductive reasoning.

{Ron]
But that is actuallly what is happening with the concept of negation
and Wilburs
Ontology, that through falsability they arrive at a explaination of the
workings of "source".
Pirsig takes value down to "dynamic quality" an lets it go. Wilbur and
the like take
it one step further and use true/false logic to set it on the firm
foundation of "nothingness".
 I think this is where Krimmel battles. 
Pirsigs take on "betterness" seems to be an extension of the theory
Of "molecular self assembley", rather than a means to an end or an
"omega point".