From: MarshaV (marshalz@charter.net)
Date: Tue Jan 11 2005 - 08:22:40 GMT
At 09:00 PM 1/10/2005 -0600, Matt wrote:
>Here is the question, “How do we know when we are being Dynamic? How do
>we know when we are following Dynamic Quality and not static
>patterns? How do we verify it?”
>
>You know what I think Pirsig’s answer is? It’s one of two things: 1) you
>just do or 2) you don’t and you won’t. The first answer places emphasis
>on (what we might call) Pirsig’s doctrine of epistemological
>individualism, which traces back to ZMM (“And what is good, Phaedrus, and
>not good—need we ask anyone to tell us these things?”). The second answer
>places emphasis on (what we might call) Pirsig’s doctrine of the
>indeterminancy of Dynamic Quality, which is an innovation in Lila (“The
>problem is that you can’t really say whether a specific change is
>evolutionary [Dynamic] at the time it occurs. It is only with a century
>or so of hindsight that it appears evolutionary.” Lila, p. 256), an
>innovation made specifically to ameliorate the problems of his
>epistemological individualism—except that I can’t see that it does
>anything but obliterate any possible (epistemological) answer.
Dear Matt,
Isn't it speculated today that our world, including the philosophic realm,
is 'word-built'? If this is true, then might it be that our Western habit
of thought and language does not accommodate describing Dynamic quality,
though it may in the future. And to stay inside your present box of
knowledge will only keep us inside your box of knowledge.
Marsha
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 : Tue Jan 11 2005 - 08:26:35 GMT