[MD] truth, again
valkyr at att.net
Tue Dec 4 00:19:08 PST 2012
I better add that within the MoQ static patterns (objects of knowledge) may be ranked by what they value: inorganic, biological, social or intellectual.
On Dec 4, 2012, at 2:40 AM, MarshaV wrote:
For me the MoQ is ontologically indeterminate (DQ), and epistemologically relativistic (sq), though "we can perceive some [patterns] to have more quality than others, but that we do so is, in part, the result our history and current patterns of values."
On Dec 4, 2012, at 2:09 AM, 118 wrote:
> Hi Marsha,
> Yes, this is the Western approach. Everything must be
> compartmentalized. Thank you Aristotle!?
> Ontology/epistemology can be analogized to DQ/SQ.
> If we view knowledge as that which we create, which is appropriate to
> MoQ (see "ghosts of reason"), then the limits of knowledge are without
> boundary. The nature is the human spirit (DQ), the method is logic,
> and the origin is Quality (DQ/SQ).
> This is how Quality is used to provide answers. Pirsig, of course,
> has many such examples, which is what Lila is all about. It is a
> shame that some see Lila as a manifesto of some sort. The examples
> are just that, not to be taken as "truth". Lila teaches how to use
> Quality to solve problems. It was never meant as dogma, Pirsig is too
> smart for that. However, we get the preachers who read from the "good
> book" and tell us all to obey what is written. There was a prophet
> about 600 years after Christ who said the same thing.
> I am sure that Pirsig is more than a little disappointed at the turn
> Quality has taken. He is probably also a bit ashamed at where this
> forum has gone. His disciple has gone astray. Well it happens to the
> best of them. His quest for fame has done exactly what he predicted
> it would.
> On Dec 3, 2012, at 12:59 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>> a branch of philosophy that investigates the origin, nature, methods, and limits of human knowledge.
>> If, if, if ...
More information about the Moq_Discuss