[MD] Analogy..what do we mean?

[X Acto]

[DMB]
Clearly, this disproves her denial and shows that she is indeed using the phrase "It's all an analogy" as a smug way to evade questions. Clearly, this disproves her claim that my complaint (and Ron's) can be dismissed as a "prejudicial projection". 

[Arlo]
I don't think Pirsig ever intended demonstrating the analogous nature of symbolic systems to be an excuse to avoid precision and clarity in thought. And I think his entire thesis of Quality is built are the understanding that "some things are better than others". And, of course, analogies are 'things' as well. 

"All this is an analogy" is, as I understand it, a pressure-release valve to the constraints of S/O inquiry. It is Goedel pointing to the incompleteness of any mathematical system. Not to weaken math. Not to make all math systems equal. Not to devalue the precision that goes into crafting a mathematical model. But to never lose sight that without the undefined, inexpressible, uncapturable "that which is always outside the system" one is trapped, running in circles, trying like the Chairman to find that Truth.

So one the one hand, "all this is an analogy" is what keeps understanding from devolving into S/O territory. On the other, it should never be an excuse to interject relativism, or bypass clarity, precision and critical thought. After all, Goedel's Incompleteness Theorum itself is a well-crafted, carefully argued, clear and precise argument. 

On a side note (and something I may bring up for discussion in its own thread at some point), I've been reading lately much of the work (that which has been translated, I don't speak Russian) of Piotr Gal'perin, a student of Vygotsky, whose research focuses on the notion that the specific quality of the concepts we teach to children directly effects their cognitive development. This is a reversal of the Piagetian concept that cognitive development is a natural/biological process of maturation and instruction should be responsive (come after) development. 

From the article, "The Quality of Cultural Tools and Cognitive Development: Gal'perin's Perspective and Its Implications": the specific character of culturally evolved cognitive tools [concepts, measures, schemas, etc.] acquired by the child in the course of instruction defines in large measure the specifics of the child's cognitive development. 

I mention this here because it not only builds from the notion that "some things are better than others", but argues there are significant consequences to how we choose and implement the things (concepts, analogies, etc.) that we use. It is not all oysters, it is a oysters and shark and carrot and wine and salad and steak and ... and the choice has consequences- by virtue of its Quality. 

Ron:
I think "consequence" as it speaks to clarity really highlights the meaning of the term "analogy". There is an implied
true-ness to it's use as it's level of quality increases and it is in this way we can really see the relationship between
child cognitive development and evolutionary cognitive development in general beacause
What this actually does is place a rather interesting spin on ontology by expanding it's foundationalism (the primacy
of what "is") . What "is" or "what is the case" replaces the more rigid objective physicalism of the dialectian and
more importantly those dogmatic assumptions which have infamously followed such "common sense" notions.
The result being that it renders ontology more empiricaly and really throws a spotlight on the importance and
value of our educational system because it is best understood as the fore front of our cultural development.
So I'm in agreement with you about that statement being a pressure release valve for paricular arguements
which base their claims on certain assumptions. I think that was a very fine way of puting it.
 
Thanks  for helping to clarify that statement in such a way as to move away from it's rhetorical use as an evasion
tactic. Since we seem to have a few new contributors.
Thanks also to both you and Dave for providing some interesting discussion.
 
..
 
..