[MD] Pirsig's theory of truth

[skutvik at online.no]

Ian and Group

4 May. 

Steve (I believe) had said:  
> Quoting Pirsig to Ant you said "For purposes of MOQ precision let´s say
> that [the assertion "X is true" is true if and only if X is true."]"
> This answer would fit his desire to stay with the usual dictionary
> definitions wherever possible, and also have that grumpy edge we might
problemaitze> expect in response to such a question." 

Ian:
> Grumpy ? Huh ? Surely that is Bob's little joke ! To show how useless a
> definition of truth is. I can hear him chuckle as he writes it. Anyway,
> I'm still a little baffled at your agenda with DMB here, maybe I'm
> outta touch ... your rhetoric is weird ... "all this is a problem for A
> who wants to dismiss X as simply YZ" Problem, wants, dismiss, simply
> ... ? Really loaded stuff. I need to back out and let DMB answer you,
> but I'm not hearing him say what you imply. Ian 

Agree Ian, I never stop to wonder how some manage to problematize 
things, and dammit it goes for the latter-day Pirsig too.  

MOQ's "theory of truth" is that intellect's TRUTH/ILLUSION - i.e. its 
objective attitude - it the highest static good. Meaning that Truth is the 
highest GOOD at that level - and only at that level!!!. Will people 
around this site never come to grips with what the MOQ is all about, 
but ruminate this arch-somish stuff till kingdom comes? Obviously

ZAMM:
    Plato hadn't tried to destroy areté. He had encapsulated it; 
    made a permanent, fixed Idea out of it; had converted it to a 
    rigid, immobile Immortal Truth. He made areté the Good, the 
    highest form, the highest Idea of all. It was subordinate only to 
    Truth itself, in a synthesis of all that had gone before. That was 
    why the Quality that Phædrus had arrived at in the classroom 
    had seemed so close to Plato's Good.  

See, this was the intellectual level emerging from the social level in an 
dynamic leap that "encapsuled" Quality into a new static form, namely 
the value of objectivity over subjectivity. The problem with ZAMM is 
that there were just SOM "destroying" Aretê, but in a MOQ retrospect 
this is the only way to see it An additional problem is those who insist 
on ZAMM not needing a Q-translation. 

Another problem is indentifying Quality with subjectivity. I.e. that Plato 
& Co only created Truth (objectivity) and that Quality is subjective, 
there has been a tendency, but I hope that is weeded out.   

Bodvar.