[MD] Pirsig's theory of truth

[Ian Glendinning]

Hopefully Bo, you can therefore see why I 99% agree with your position.

In a way, the only thing I resist in your position is the tendency to
wrap the good in a static conception of the MoQ - exactly as you / and
Pirsig criticize Plato in that quote.

In the same way as SOM destroyed Arete by rigidly encasing it, it is
possible to do the same with Quality in the MoQ if we don't allow it
(and its definitions) room to breathe, room for atma.

You're happy being 99% perfect, but I ... wanna go one better ;-)
Ian

On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 4:59 PM,  <skutvik at online.no> wrote:
> 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.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>