[MD] Tuukka's letter to Robert Pirsig

[Ant McWatt]

Ant
stated March 28th:

 

BTW, the notions of romantic and classic quality aren't part of the MOQ in
LILA.  For the sake of clarification
(especially concerning the academics 
that you referred to in your recent letter; let alone new readers to
Pirsig's work!) it would be better to stick to one framework or the other.

 

 

Tuukka responded on the same day:

I've unified the frameworks. Even if I hadn't, it certainly wouldn't be
impossible to do so. Please see my letter to Pirsig, posted on this forum
earlier, if you wish to know more.


 

 

Ant
McWatt comments:  Tukkaa, I’ve read your
letter that you posted at MOQ Discuss on March 27th and, amongst all
the obscure Ptolemaic thinking, can’t see where you’ve unified the two distinct
metaphysical frameworks found in ZMM and LILA. 


 

Pirsig
cites the example of an American Indian going out on a Vision Quest in Chapter
9 of LILA as being outside classic and romantic aspects of the universe.  So, firstly, I am wondering how you’d address
this issue? 

Secondly, you seem to missing a few logical steps in that letter.  For instance, what does "nonrelativizably" mean in that phrase "nonrelativizably used predicate"?  I only ask as part of F.S.C. Northrop's problem in being understood in the Academy (let alone by the wider public) is that his metaphysical structures became (relatively) very intricate, large and unwieldy.  For instance, check out his text "The Logic of the Science and Humanities" and his diagrams of all these concepts by inspection, intuition, postulation, etc.  It's not for the faint hearted!

 

Best
wishes,

 

Ant.



> Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 04:16:01 +0300
> From: mail at tuukkavirtaperko.net
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] Tuukka's letter to Robert Pirsig
> 
> All,
> apparently the letter came through almost instantly after I posted a 
> notification that it didn't. I did not intend to confuse you.
> 
> -Tuukka
> 
> 
> 
> 27.3.2012 4:10, Tuukka Virtaperko wrote:
>
> > Ian, all,
> > I posted my letter to Robert Pirsig here about an hour ago for 
> > evaluation and a second opinion. I wanted to make sure I express 
> > myself clearly in that letter. Unfortunately, for some reason, the 
> > letter didn't come through. In the meantime, you can read the letter 
> > here:
> >
> > http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/b6r/tuukkas_letter_to_robert_pirsig/
> >
> > I will appreciate your feedback.
> >
> > -Tuukka