[MD] Philosophy and Abstraction

[Matt Kundert]

Marsha said 1:
Within the MoQ, truth(sq) is considered relative, and within Buddhism 
conditioned(conventional) truth is considered relative, and since static 
quality and  the conditioned in Buddhist philosophy are synonymous, 
instead of defending James and Pirsig against the accusation of 
relativism, one should defend relativism against SOM attack of 
immorality.

Marsha said 2:
The MoQ may be stepping away from a cultural relativism where 
morally anything goes, but that is not stepping away from 
epistemological relativism where truth is understood to be relative.

Marsha said 3:
Truth is not absolute.  Truth is not relative.  Truth is a static pattern 
of value - delusion.  Throw it out and you experience divine silence.

Steve said:
Throw away all truths and you've just discarded a bunch of useful 
tools.

Marsha said 4:
Exactly my point.  And since 'static patterns R us,' to understand 
them as relative is important to the way we choose to live.

Matt:
Marsha's delimiting of the MoQ as a kind of epistemological 
relativism, and not cultural or moral, is a great step in definition, 
in particular her addendum that this _understanding_ of relativity 
is itself an important plank in who we culturally are.  It is what 
Isaiah Berlin basically laid out as the way of democracy versus the 
way of totalitarianism in his famous "Two Concepts of Liberty."

The only place where I, and presumably Steve, back away is that 
while we agree with the substance of what Marsha calls 
epistemological relativism, we don't feel the force of the "should" 
in (1) and don't see the point of "delusion" in (3).  We have 
different vocabularies for negotiating the issues and label-wars of 
philosophical discussion.  However, the underlying content--when 
we push aside the idiosyncratic differences in stating points--is a 
Pirsigian and Jamesian one.  (And Rortyan.)

Matt