Hi Andrea,
ANDREA:
I always thought what Pirsig meant with that statement about gravity was
much simpler... that is, that the "law of gravity" (not gravitation) is
something in the eye (mind) of the (post-Newtonian) observer of falling
apples and such, and that no such thing was in the eye (mind) of the
(pre-Newtonian) observer. This makes the worlds of the pre- and post-N.
observers different; both see apples fall, but the latter sees them fall
according to, and due to, the law of gravity.
Pirsig is saying this and something else more radical. If he was saying
something "much simpler", as you think, then it doesn't jibe with him
characterizing his own proposition as "nutty", and what you have
written above is not nutty; it's perfectly reasonable. Please re-read the
gravity passage and try to read what is written on the page, and not what
you'd like it to say.
ANDREA:
With that, I also
think that Pirsig rejects, or is not interested in, the idea that the
"real" world is something that exists apart of the "world we see"... and
that our perception of the world, that is all we can actually call world
at all, is necessarily a function of the maps we have... so "inventing"
the law of gravity changed the world for all of us (who studied Newton's
law at school).
I think he is dubious of the reality we even see with our eyes and all our
other senses. To him this is all a static universe, real in the sense that
it seems real but secondary to the only true reality which creates it.
ANDREA:
As a side note, IMHO, it makes no sense at all to say that gravitation
existed before Newton. Gravitation isn't even an empirically observable
something. Forces (such as gravitation "is") are an abstraction used to
formulate shorter sentences about the (empirically observable) behavior
of "things".
Hmmm. It sounds like you not only believe gravity didn't exist before
Newton, but after as well. Forces like gravity are not generally believed
to be solely an abstraction. It is assumed that something is responsible
for causing apples to fall to the ground. Also denying the reality of
things we cannot perceive with our own senses is not always a wise thing. Dogs can
hear and smell things we cannot, afterall, and we cannot
perceive radio waves or carbon monoxide, for example.
Glenn
__________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at
http://webmail.netscape.com/
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
