From: Platt Holden (email@example.com)
Date: Sun Nov 17 2002 - 15:53:05 GMT
Hi David, Matt, All:
> Pirsig writes (again in Lila's Child): "I believe there are a number of
> philosophic systems, notably Ayn Rand's "Objectivism," that call the "I" or
> "individual" the central reality. Buddhists say it is an illusion. So do
Pirsig continues the above with these words:
"The MOQ says it is a collection of static patterns capable of
apprehending Dynamic Quality. I think that if you identify the "I" with
the intellect and nothing else you are taking an unusual position that
may need some defending."
This raises a question I haven't found Pirsig answering directly: Does an
organism need an intellectual pattern in its "collection" in order to be
capable of responding to DQ? Or in plain English: "Can only humans
respond to DQ?
If the answer to the latter question is Yes, then "I" is dependent on the
intellectual pattern having evolved, making the association of the
individual with the intellectual level logically sound.
As for Ayn Rand, while she denies the existence of society, the theme
of her books like The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged is the struggle
between intellectual and social value patterns--the social pattern of
sacrifice for the benefit of others vs. the intellectual pattern of freedom to
pursue one's own ends.
I'm not arguing for or against Rand's philosophy, nor is it appropriate to
do so on this site. I'm merely pointing out the usefulness of the MoQ in
understanding thematic conflicts in literature, as in so many other
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 2.1.5 : Sun Nov 17 2002 - 15:54:15 GMT