[MD] Reductionism

[craigerb at comcast.net]

[Ham] 
> I see no difference between a pattern and a thing-in-itself. 

This is part of your trouble.  If there were TiTs, there would be only one correct 
way to apprehend them.  But like in the "duck/rabbit figure", there can be more than 
one correct pattern that emerges. 


[Ham] 
> Philosophical theory is not a cumulative discipline like the physical sciences. 

This is minority view.  Most philosophers hold that there is such progress in 
philosophy.  

[Ham] 
> The value of an idea is timeless 

Not so.  The value of an idea is relative to its circumstances. 

[Ham] 
> it is small-minded to regard an idea as having special significance simply 
> because it is "modern". 

No.  That an idea is currently valuable is the most important 
measure of its value. 


[Craig, previously] 

> The better view is determined by its explanatory value. 

[Ham] 
> I posit Absolute Essence as the uncreated, undifferentiated, and unchanging source from which all otherness 
is negated.  Pirsig posits DQ as "the Quality of freedom [that] creates this 
world in which we live, these patterns of static quality, the quality of 
order [that] preserves our world."  Which view has more "explanatory value"? 

Craig?  Marsha? 

--Ham 
Craig