Tukka said: Pirsig does state that idealism is good for understanding the MOQ. The question is, if idealism and the MOQ are both bad ideas, can idealism still be good for understanding the MOQ?
dmb says: In ZAMM the reader is introduced to the basic positions of Hume and Kant and they represent Modern Empiricism and Idealism, respectively. This part happens early in the book to "prepare" us for the high country of the mind. The book includes some serious bashing of the founding Kings of Empiricism and Idealism, namely Aristotle and Plato. And both schools more or less buy into SOM but each school of philosophy is defined by picking one side or the other. This is what Pirsig is up against, this is the genetic defect, and understanding the problem with these schools is important for understanding the solution the Pirsig offers in the shape of the MOQ. Tukka said: The Heinous Quadrilemma remains. dmb says: Pretty sure that problem is just a product of some misconceptions on your part. <http://moq.org/md/archives.html> ________________________________ 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
