[MD] cloud of probability

[david buchanan]

Dan commented on Pirsig's ghost story:
...What RMP is getting at in the passages above is that gravity isn't a physical process. Nor is Quality. The fact that we "know" all about Newton and gravity makes us very certain about the "external" world existing apart from our own self. And the MOQ says that the idea that the world exists is a high quality idea. But it is only an idea. There is no way to be certain that there really is a world "out there" apart from the self.


dmb says:
Right. This ghost story is all about the problem of reification. Even if you don't know the term, it's pretty clear that you get the idea. 
Somebody asked Pirsig if apples obeyed the law of gravity before Newton invented it. No, he said, they just fell. There is the ancient idea that material objects fall down because that is there natural place in God's order. Newton's explanation for that is very different and Einstein's is different from Newton's. Each of these explanations come with a fairly elaborate metaphysical context and thereby add a whole bunch of invisible forces BEHIND our ordinary, concrete experiences, behind those falling apples just as you experienced it.

The whole of reality as we conceive it is an evolved pile of analogies, right? This is another way to talk about the ghosts of rationality. Either way we are talking about the mythos within which we think and talk. We invent earth and sky, gods and laws, religions and sciences and that's our static reality. But all of this was generated in response to Quality. That's why it can't be defined. It is the generator of the mythos, of the whole system of definable static realities. And the mythos we inherit is a product of evolution. It's a pile of inventions that have worked well enough that they have survived and been passed on for further use. And it will continue to evolve but not so quickly that my words will lose all meaning by this afternoon. The meaning of "gravity" can change over the centuries but that doesn't mean the definition is some ineffable mystery. Some people will have a richer or deeper understanding of the term but that doesn't alter the definition. That's just a matter of how much time and energy one spends on the concept. And it's not really a different concept if you say it in French or German either.

The ghosts that make up our mythos have been so darn successful that it's normal to believe that our inventions are not inventions, that "gravity" is not just a concept about reality but reality itself. Same thing goes for "subject" and "objects" and "objective reality" and "substance" and "God".