RE: LS March 1999 Program Topic

From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Tue Feb 23 1999 - 10:30:24 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keith A. Gillette [SMTP:keith.gillette@usa.net]
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 1999 6:14 AM
> To: lilasquad@moq.org
> Subject: LS March 1999 Program Topic
>
> "With the Metaphysics of Quality, Pirsig proposes a 'Copernican
> Revolution'
> in our understanding of reality, placing undefined value at the center
> and
> dividing it into static and Dynamic Quality. How are those of us still
> mired in a subject-object view of the world to wrap our minds around
> this
> transformation? Is this static-dynamic split merely an epistemic
> convenience that we make arbitrarily or is it an ontological reality,
> transcending our thoughts and intellectual description of it?"
>
> Vote for this question or draft your own! I'll keep track of the votes
> and
> make a decision, announcing the new question for the first of March.
>
> Cheers,
> Keith
>
        [David Buchanan] Keith and Y'all: I have to vote no on this
question, which is actually several questions. "How are we to wrap our
minds around this transformation?" Isn't this a question of the learning
process itself? And if one has read both books and participates in this
forum, but has still not made the transformation, I dare say such a
person is intellectually incorrigible. I'd also point to the phrases
"epistemic convenience" and "ontological reality". They may very well be
carefully selected words, but I'd suggest clear, simple language. Our
starting points should always be crystal clear. Really understanding the
question is most of the work in philosophy. Maybe if these two phrases
were explicitly defined... Besides, if I understand the question, its a
slam dunk. LILA PAGE 103 "Within a Metsphysics of Quality, science (and
metaphysics) is a set of static intellectual patterns.., but the
patterns are NOT the reality they describe." My vote is no. Sorry.

        I'd like to suggest a little formula that will work whatever
topic is up for election. In each case the proposed issue should include
a quote from Lila and a single question or claim about it. That way
we'll be sure to stay relevant to Pirsig's ideas, but we'll also be
adding our own spin and direction those thoughts. I've been trying to
find an example that's good enough to actually consider for March....

        PAGE 377 (HB) "He thought some more about Lila's insanity and
how it was related to religious mysticism and how both were integrated
into reason by the MOQ. He thought about how once this integration
occurs and Dynamic Quality is identified with religious mysticism it
produces an avalanche of information as to what Dynamic Quality is."
DESCRIBE ANY OF THE INFORMATION IN THIS AVALANCHE.

        How's that? A quote and a direction is all we need. Does it look
like fun? Oh. please vote for mine. Please Please Please??? :-)

        If not the topic, how about the formula?

        David

MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:35 GMT