[MD] Four Ducks walk into a bar.

[david buchanan]

In the "Decision" thread, Arlo said:
["Four!"] is not a sentence...


Craig replied:
Substitute "Duck!".


dmb says:

Grammatically correct sentences do generally require a subject and object but I think it is a mistake to conflate this with subject-object metaphysics. The former refers to the structure of language, to the parts of speech but the latter refers to the structure of reality. 

The relationship between the two is relevant in a different sort of way, however. If Pirsig is right, there is a reason why languages without that sort of structure are also unlikely to arrive at a subject-object metaphysics. I think the structure of the language is related to the structure of metaphysics the way social level patterns are related to intellectual level patterns. The latter grows out of the former. The Christian soul morphed into the Cartesian mind in similar way. This is how analogies grow in relation to previous analogies, how new concepts can only ever be conceived in relation to the old concepts. And this is really just a way of saying that our basic thought structures greatly influence all of the more advanced and abstract conceptualizations. 

But we can see that the grammatical demands of english are just habits of language. As Pirsig points out, the assertions of the MOQ "may sound a little awkward at first, but that's a matter of linguistic custom, not science. The language used to describe the data is changed but the scientific data itself is unchanged."   ...   "Again the difference linguistic. It doesn't make a whit of difference in the laboratory which term is used. No dials change their readings. The observed laboratory data are exactly the same." (Lila, pages 104 and 105 respectively)

"When one takes the whole ill-shaped, misfitting structure of a subject-object explained universe apart and puts it back together in a value-centered metaphysics, all kinds of orphaned puzzle pieces fit beautifully that never fit before." (Lila 102)

"Actually the issue before him was not whether there should be a metaphysics of quality or not. There already IS a metaphysics of Quality. A subject-object metaphysics is in fact a metaphysics in which the first division of Quality - the first slice of undivided experience - is into subjects and objects. Once you have made that slice, all of human experience is supposed to fit into one of these two boxes. The trouble is, it doesn't. What he had seen was that there is a metaphysical box that sits above these two boxes, Quality itself. And once he'd seen this he also saw a huge number of ways in which Quality can be divided. Subjects and objects are just one of the ways." (Lila 108)

Here we see another reason to deny Bo's equation. SOM is just one way to slice it. The MOQ is another. Isn't he saying that they are both products of the analytical knife? And isn't that just another way of saying they are both intellectual? Intellect is what divides undivided experience, not any particular division. That's way too narrow, so narrow that slicing things up any other way would be impossible. Problem is, that's exactly what the MOQ is. It's a different way to divide the undivided reality.


p.s. "Fore!" is short for "Watch out in front!". It's what ducks say when other golfers are on the fairway ahead of them but they're too impatient to wait. Of course when they say it, "Fore!" just sounds like any other "Quack!". This only increases the chances of injury because the other golfers get distracted looking for the hidden water hazard. You'd be surprised to learn how many golfers are killed by ducks each year. This is a valuable warning. 

p.s.s. The bartender asked them what they were having and the biggest duck said, "I'd like fore drinks and please put it on my bill". 


> Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 19:04:41 +0000
> Subject: [MD]  Decision
> 
> [Arlo said]
> > ["Four!"] is not a sentence...
>  
> [Craig replied]
> 
> Substitute "Duck!".
> 

 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4