[MD] theories of truth

[MarshaV]

dmb,

From these quotes you seem to have extracted  and formulated some kind of belief that you think I violate.  But accusing me of violating your ambiguous beliefs is silly and not something I am not willing to give time to.  Please extract from these RMP quotes the precise symbols and exact rules in which you think I lack coherence and I will take a serious look at them.  And if possible, do it with some seriousness and without the sarcasm, irony, parody and insults.
 
 
Marsha  






On May 24, 2013, at 11:13 PM, david buchanan wrote:

> John and Sylvia, the Sutherlands, were real people but in Pirsig's first book they also represented millions of people who, like them, felt alienated by technology and our technological world. We start out with ghost stories and little repair lessons involving handlebars and beer-can shims. But before you know it, he has you thinking about the foundations of science and the kind of metaphysics behind our scientific world. And then, by time we get to the artful mechanic, we even reach mystical peaks.
> The art of motorcycle maintenance is miniature study in the art of rationality itself, he says. The solution is not to run away from technology or science or rationality. No, Pirsig wants to show us how the Buddha resides in the gears of a motorcycle every bit as much as the lotus flower. That's a metaphor for science and rationality too. That's the aspect of the Buddha that hasn't been talked to death already. 
> That's what static intellectual quality, as it's construed in his second, is supposed to be all about. This is not a contest between gears and lotus flowers. It's not a contest between intellectuals and mystics. It's about Pirsig's reformation of rationality, where Quality and value are integrated into intellectual values. They're are distinctly different but they're not mutually exclusive. They are supposed to work together. That's the whole point of the MOQ! 
> But what does Marsha put on display day after day after day? 
> 
> A profound alienation from anything and everything intellectual! Kill, kill, kill the philosophers! Logic is for losers! Definitions are degenerate! And how many other MOQers echo this upside down, totally backwards nonsense? One is too many.
> 
> Dumping on the motorcycle gears is dumping the lotus is dumping on the Buddha is dumping yourself is dumping on the world. There is no freaking way that this counts as a good idea by Pirsig's lights. Not a chance.
> 
> 
> I'll reproduce the evidence so it can be ignored once again.-------------------------
> 
> "Thus did he seek to turn the attack. The subject for analysis, the patient on the table, was no longer Quality, but analysis itself. Quality was healthy and in good shape. Analysis, however, seemed to have something wrong with it that prevented it from seeing the obvious." 
> 
> 
> "A real understanding of Quality doesn't just serve the System, or even beat it or even escape it. A real understanding of Quality CAPTURES the system, tames it, and puts it to work for on'w own personal use, while leaving one completely free to fulfill his inner destiny." (ZAMM, p.223)
> 
> 
> "I don't mind the Quality, it's just that all the classical talk about it ISN'T Quality. Quality is just a focal point around which a lot of intellectual furniture is getting re-arranged." (ZAMM, p.223)
> 
> 
> "I think furthermore, that all his metaphysical mountain climbing did absolutely nothing to further either our understanding of what Quality is or of what the Tao is. Not a thing.   That sounds like an overwhelming rejection of what he said and thought, but it isn't. I think it's a statement that he would have agreed with himself, since any description of Quality is a kind of definition and must therefore fall short of its mark.  ...No, he did nothing for Quality or the Tao. What benefitted was reason. He showed a way by which reason may be EXPANDED to include elements that have previously been unassimilable and thus have been considered irrational. I think it's the overwhelming presence of these irrational elements crying for assimilation that creates the present bad quality, the chaotic disconnected spirit of the twentieth century." (ZAMM, p. 257)
> 
> 
> "I think that it will be found that a formal acknowledgment of the role of Quality in the scientific process doesn't destroy the empirical vision at all. It expands it, strengthens it and brings it far closer to actual scientific practice." (ZAMM)
> 
> 
> Similarly, in LILA Pirsig wrote: 
> 
> 
> "The Metaphysics of Quality says that science's empirical rejection of biological and social values is not only rationally correct, it is also morally correct because the intellectual patterns of science are of a higher evolutionary order than the old biological and social patterns. But the Metaphysics of Quality also says that Dynamic Quality - the value-force that chooses an elegant mathematical solution to a laborious one, or a brilliant experiment over a confusing, inconclusive one-is another matter altogether. Dynamic Quality is a higher moral order than static scientific truth, and it is as immoral for philosophers of science to try to suppress Dynamic Quality as it is for church authorities to suppress scientific method. Dynamic value is an integral part of science. It is the cutting edge of scientific progress itself." 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 		 	   		  
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html


 
___