From: Ron Winchester (phaedruswolff@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Jan 26 2005 - 23:35:49 GMT
Matt:
Part of the dangers of "speaking off the top of your head" and "in general"
is accusation-by-implicature. Your general discourse in relation to me has
been, as I understand it, one of disagreement. As such, when you start
forwarding such (normally innocuous) theses as "For
one to develop her own philosophy, it requires an ability to 'Think'"
combined with "you can learn a lot from these masters of philosophy, but
these masters of philosophy do not 'Teach' philosophy, any more than they
were taught philosophy. For them to become great masters, they had to
'Learn' their philosophy; they had to think on their own terms," the
implication is that I'm not developing my own philosophy, nor thinking, but
more like parroting the masters.
So I am in a lot of ways. But I doubt I'm not thinking, nor do I doubt the
validity, energy, or Quality of any of things I've been saying. A personal
idiom does not ipso facto mean you are doing Quality work. Its more
complicated than that as I think the history of philosophy (as the history
of these very geniuses in question) brings out.
Hi Matt;
Pretty much what I am trying to say is that when you limit your philosophy
to the 'Norm' or 'Paradigm' of previously held beliefs, then you are
limiting yourself as the church would limit a saint. If your experience must
be verified or validated to meet these previously held beliefs, or compared
to see if it fits in with the previously held beliefs, then you are bound to
your cultural beliefs; those that I feel are already built into your psyche
from just simply living in, or descending from the culture. Everything you
think, when all you are exposed to is Western philosophy is going to be
verified by Western philosophy, so that then you are bound to Western
philosophy.
When you are subjected to Eastern philosophy, then you expand your horizons;
you are no longer bound to Western philosophy. Western philosophy might
offer some grand thoughts from philosophology, and these thoughts should be
taken into consideration, but not blindly followed. Eastern philosophy lends
itself to not offering guidelines, but offering the idea that you should not
follow guidelines, but look within to find your answers.
You can study philosophology, science, religion, art, and mathematics, but
when it comes time to develop your own philosophy, it only comes from 'Your
own' experience, and not the experiences of the masters. You must unlearn
before you are able to learn. You must unlearn the 'Prejudices' that have
been built up in you that leave you bound to purely static patterns. You
must be open to Dynamic Quality.
If you take insult to this, it is not my thoughts you are taking insult to,
but your own thoughts that lead you to say I am saying "You (Matt) are
incapable of thinking." If I thought you personally were incapable of
thinking, then I would not be bothering to spend time offering my thoughts.
>From: "Matt Kundert" <pirsigaffliction@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>Subject: RE: MD Them pesky pragmatists
>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:40:16 -0600
>
>Wolff,
>
>Matt said:
>Both Paul and Wolff seem to suggest that I’ve stopped thinking. But where
>is the evidence for that?
>
>Wolff said:
>May I ask how I "seem to suggest" this?
>
>Matt:
>Part of the dangers of "speaking off the top of your head" and "in general"
>is accusation-by-implicature. Your general discourse in relation to me has
>been, as I understand it, one of disagreement. As such, when you start
>forwarding such (normally innocuous) theses as "For
>one to develop her own philosophy, it requires an ability to 'Think'"
>combined with "you can learn a lot from these masters of philosophy, but
>these masters of philosophy do not 'Teach' philosophy, any more than they
>were taught philosophy. For them to become great masters, they had to
>'Learn' their philosophy; they had to think on their own terms," the
>implication is that I'm not developing my own philosophy, nor thinking, but
>more like parroting the masters.
>
>So I am in a lot of ways. But I doubt I'm not thinking, nor do I doubt the
>validity, energy, or Quality of any of things I've been saying. A personal
>idiom does not ipso facto mean you are doing Quality work. Its more
>complicated than that as I think the history of philosophy (as the history
>of these very geniuses in question) brings out.
>
>Matt
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
>
>
>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
>
_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
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 : Wed Jan 26 2005 - 23:39:13 GMT