In a message dated 9/12/02 2:22:49 PM GMT Daylight Time,
> >Subjects and Objects existed in the time of Homer and Ancient Chinese
> >culture, but intellectual patterns still flourished. People were
> >individuated in name and many other culturally dominant ways, but
> >intellect could still deal and mediate them.
> Small but fascinating detail: According to some scholars the ancient
> Greeks didn't have concepts for what we later called subject and
> object. Especially in Homer's writings these terms are apparently
> not found. This gives some extremely interesting perspectives for
> MOQ. See
> * R.B. Onians, The Origins of European Thought about the Body, the
> Mind, the Soul, the World, Time and Fate. Cambridge: CUP, 1988.
> * M.L. West, Early Greek Philosophy and the Orient. Oxford: OUP,
> 2001 (repr.)
> for Dutch readers:
> * Charles Vergeer, Eerste vragen. Over de Griekse filosofie. SUN, 1988
Was Homer an intelligent man even though his culture had no concept of
subjects and objects?
Does discriminating on the basis of quality before the advent of subjects and
objects require intelligence?
Homer saw unity in all things; particular events played out on a Universal
stage that was there distinct from those who were either gifted or abandoned
by the Gods.
We all discriminate, and for Homer discrimination was a moral activity. That
is what Pirsig reminds us of; we can still use subjects and objects, but the
underlying philosophy is a moral one, and not a blind amoral one.
Bo suggests that quality as an idea emerged from the subject/object discrimi
nation, which to my view is ludicrous.
All the best,
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 25 2002 - 16:06:31 BST