Kevin, all,
> From: "Kevin Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ...both embrace direct experience as opposed to rationality
> pirsig calls this 'empiricism' (again showing some ignorance)
> heidegger calls this 'phenemonology'...
I agree that Pirsigian empiricism does not resemble empiricism as generally
understood, but if you fail to pick up on Pirsig's connection with the
rather different 'radical empiricism' of James, this invites one to use the
easily abused term 'ignorance' in quite another direction. I see that I
have not successfully resisted the temptation. Yes, in some respects
radical empiricism resembles phenomenology. But, chronologically speaking,
I think you'll find James got there first (so perhaps it was heiddeger who
should be counted 'ignorant'?). Of course, Heraclitus got there thousands
of years before either. (I've heard good reports of Heidegger's respect for
the presocratics - you may wish to expand on this)
> see? most of pirsig's work is overly-simplistic and redundant
See? No, I don't see. Please try to start with some premises, conduct and
argument, and then and only then proceed to a conclusion. Cutting out the
intervening stages simply leads one to doubt that your conclusion is a
'conclusion' at all. It looks more like a shot at nose tweaking (which of
course it is).
In particular, I'd like you to say a bit more about why you think H's Being
is analogous to Pirsig's Quality. You've remarked the similarities that one
would expect, given that both H and P treat their respective ontological
foundations as (guess what) ontological foundations. What you have done
rather less to show is what on earth H's Being has to do with Value.
I likes the quotes you cited: they made me want to *try* reading Heideggeer
at least (there's something interesting there about the "perception becomes
definition" remark). But if that's the best translation you can come up
with, it looks like H is in the running with Kant for the "most inpenetrable
sentence construction in the history of german philosophy" award.
Oh, and I find that your poetry scans (well done), but your philosophy often
doesn't contain sentences (not so good). Full stops, verbs, logical
operators: these may be the crutches of the intellectually infirm, but do
try to help us no-brainers out, please.
e
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
