[MD] in defence of the "relative"

[Matt Kundert]

Hi Ron,

Ron said:
You said a mouthful, just what kind of meaning is Pirsig 
crafting? It seems as if he's after the kind of Pragmatic 
correspondance as Aristotle was, that of the primary first 
principles of the senses and their meanings with the 
reduction of assumptions. Long and short, a restatement 
of book Alpha. Which, arguably needed restatement.

The art of measurement was the focal point, the link 
from Plato's Protagoras to Aristotles work on first 
philosophy. As with all measurement the most important 
art is the craft of points of beginning, of first principles of 
the measurement of the senses for there is where 
meaning, if there is any at all, resides as the beginning 
of explaination.

Matt:
I'm not sure how the above explains what "more 
empirical" means.

What are "the primary first principles of the senses"?  
The "senses" give us "principles"?  There's a sense 
(excuse the pun) in which, yeah, if we are old-school 
empiricists as Pirsig wants, it _all_ comes from the 
senses, but your twist seems to suggest a battle-cry of 
"back to the senses!" as if shit's getting in the way of 
them.  Traditionally, this shit has be "concepts," or 
language generally, but then what do I make of 
"primary principles of the senses"?  It sounds like our 
senses are supposed to give us _specific_ principles 
that we've been getting wrong (because of all the shit 
in the way, namely I suppose these accrued 
assumptions we need to trim down on).

I like "measurement," "ratio," but "first principles of 
the measurement of the senses" remains as opaque 
as "primary first principles of the senses."

Matt
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/