[MD] The Dynamics of Value

[MarshaV]

On Mar 5, 2011, at 12:24 PM, Andre Broersen wrote:

> 
> Andre:
> ...
> As Charlene Seigfried, an eminent James scholar, says: 'What is' (metaphysics) cannot be designated
> apart from how we know it (epistemology). Neither can it be grasped apart from what we value'. The traditional distinctions between ontology, epistemology and ethics breaks down so that knowledge and will, facts and values are fused and this is how the MOQ unites facts and values.  
> As you say above, you simply reject Pirsig's MOQ thesis and that is why I am still wondering what you are doing here Ham. I mean this respectfully.
> Look carefully at the sentence you wrote above:'And without realization by a 'sensible agents, it is meaningless'. Think about it in the light of what I wrote, specifically the word 'realization'. For something to be 'realized' it must have value, otherwise one will not realize it. No matter how 'sensible' your agent is. This is what Pirsig's MOQ is made up of.


Andre,

Funny, I don't remember a Seigfried quote stating anything at all about the MoQ.  But I do remember presenting you with a quote stating that the MoQ is not intended to be within any philosophic tradition, that, I imagine would include' the Jamesian tradition


Marsha 
 
___