[MD] Intellect's Symposium

[david buchanan]

John quoted Jacquelyn Ann K. Kegley and then said:

See, that's the overthrow of SOM right there.  Science is itself an object of inquiry, subject to higher values.  This is what Pirsig was on about and what has been going on in our world for some time.

dmb says:
I didn't see the overthrow of SOM in there. There are some related problems that Royce seems to be addressing, like the idea value-free science, but quote seemed wholly unrelated to the assumptions of subject-object metaphysics, let alone overcoming them. 
On the last page of chapter 29 in Lila, you'll see that the only thing "higher" than science is DQ. As far as static patterns go, intellectual patterns are the best we can have. If Royce meant that science should be "social" as it's meant in the MOQ, which is extremely unlikely, then his view would be considered immoral. If he just meant that science can only exist in a cultural context, then he's only saying what everybody says. 
I'm just going by the things you post here but so far, I have to say, Royce has been, um, let's just say... unimpressive.

  
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469230/direct/01/