[MD] Science and the MOQ

[Ham Priday]

 [Krimel]:
> The point is that mathematical laws result on assumptions.
> Base 10 is culturally determined.  Dozens or expressions
> in base 12 are a hold over from early cultural assumptions.
> I would say that a life lived clinging to some rigid ideas
> about an absolute is a delusion.

If you really believe that mathematics is culturally determined, Krimel, 
then you are using "cultural" as a synonym for "empirical".  Do you also 
believe that logical principles are culturally determined?  That the fact of 
your existence is culturally determined?   Do you regard physical 
reality--the objective world--as culture?
If your answer to these questions is 'yes', could you define what cultural 
means to you?

> I think your teleological notion is grossly mistaken but
> I don't see how it connects in the least to subjectivity.

Well then, please tell me how teleology connects to objectivity, since is it 
clear that nothing of your selfness is subjective.  It's understandable that 
Pirsig would want to resolve the subject/object duality through a Quality 
ontology.  But I find it incredulous that an MoQer could view his reality as 
totally otherness.

> But when such an ontology runs counter to and leads away
> from what is confirmed by science and math, it deserves to be
> rejected regardless of whatever satisfaction it affords.
> Frankly, if "satisfaction" is all we are looking for heroin is a surer 
> bet.

I expect you to tell me that science and math are "culturally determined". 
In that case, what makes them sacrosanct?  I see nothing about culture that 
is stable, reliable, or revealing of truth.  Of course, were I to take up 
heroine smoking I might have a different view.  At least I am certain of my 
subjective existence, an assumption which you appear to be grappling with. 
It must be the pot!

Talk to me when your head has cleared.

Regards,
Ham