From: Elizaphanian (Elizaphanian@members.v21.co.uk)
Date: Sun Dec 01 2002 - 09:50:12 GMT
Hi David,
> DMB says:
> Epiphenomenal? This is certainly where we disagree. It seems to me, and I
> think this is what Pirsig is saying in the quote, that religion is
> secondary. It seems pretty clear to me that religions and churches follow
> from the mystical experience. They've grown out of it and refer back to
it.
Thing is, I don't disagree that DQ is 'higher' than any of the static forms,
or that it is the origin of religion. I particularly agree with you that
religions have 'grown out of it and refer back to it'. It's just that I
think an awareness of what has already been 'discovered' or 'static latched'
can help you get to the 'cutting edge' more effectively (and that that is
what the Christian mystics do). What they *don't* do, in my understanding,
is to try and generate 'experiences'. That is, there is a difference of
degree, and not of kind, between mystical awareness and spiritual growth.
Mystical experience is not a different category of experiencing to any other
form of experiencing, and it doesn't provide a surer ground for static
knowledge (other than subjectively). To say otherwise is a form of
'spiritual positivism' - and is, in fact, a species of SOM thinking as I
understand it. Ooh. That might be worth spelling out.....once I've been
cured of my own residual SOM biases by Wim ;-)
Sam
"Ask yourselves when are we going to see the first journal of bio-hacking
oriented toward teenage males, so they can create molecules in their
bedroom. Well, that journal came out in 1998. Be very afraid." (Bill Joy)
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Dec 01 2002 - 09:48:25 GMT