RE: MD Pirsig's conception of ritual

From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun Mar 09 2003 - 02:25:45 GMT

  • Next message: David Buchanan: "RE: MD Making sense of it (levels)"

    Pirsig:
    'If ritual always comes first and intellectual principles always come later,
    then ritual cannot always be a decadent corruption of intellect.'

    Wim:
    I agree that there is a difference between "are" and "derived from", but
    there is also a difference inside Pirsig's text between 'derived from' and
    'not always a decadent corruption of intellect' which can be mended by
    interpreting rituals NOT only as social patterns of values but ALSO as
    (machine language type) first symbols that stand for experience in the
    intellectual level.

    DMB says:
    There is no need for mending. The two statements are entirely consistent
    with each other. "Ritual always comes first and intellectual principles
    always come later" and "the first intellectual truths could have been
    derived from ritual" both say exactly the same thing about the order of
    things. I honestly don't know how you can get tangled up in this. It seems
    so obvious to me. Intellectual principles always come later and are derived
    from from the previous level. No problem.

    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 : Sun Mar 09 2003 - 02:26:45 GMT