Re: [MD] MD Quality, DQ and SQ

From: Rebecca Temmer (ratemmer.lists@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Dec 06 2005 - 20:53:11 GMT

  • Next message: Ham Priday: "Re: [MD] [MD} MD 4th level - The more autonomous level"

    Hi Bo.

    You said:
    Aretê is Quality as it manifests at the social level, that's correct
    enough, but it sounds like Paul sees Aretê as intellectual too. But
    why are things described as if the intellectuals (dialecticians)
    were the enemies of Aretê. That's your question.

    Rebecca:
    That wasn't my question at all. What I wanted to know was whether, in Paul's
    view, Arete and DQ were the same things.
    I have not come to any firm conclusions about the social and intellectual
    levels. I'm willing to postulate, however, that Arete can be both social
    and intellectual.

    Bo:
    It sounds like mastering something - whatever - is Aretê to Paul.
    Showing great skills on the battlefield is the same as coming up
    with great theories. This muddles things up completely

    Rebecca:
    This doesn't muddle anything for me. Dharma and Arete are not about
    mastering anything - that is merely the allusion the Greeks used in order to
    convey the idea of Arete. They needed metaphor to explain to what it was;
    it need not be only in battle that one can attain the good.

    Bo:
    Look! In the "Romantic/Classic" metaphysics the transition from
    Aretê to Intellect is described as

       "...it's here that the classic mind for the first time took
       leave of its romantic origin...(page 366)

    Rebecca:
    I was under the impression that Pirsig rejected the romantic/classic split
    that he first came up with in ZMM in favour of DQ/SQ in Lila because the
    Quality divide, which he says is more fundamental, is what the MOQ is based
    on.

    Bo:
    Thus it's plain that (in a MOQ retrospect) Aretê or Romantic
    correspond to the social level while Dialectics or Classic
    correspond to the intellectual and what is described the latter
    breaking loose from the former.

    Rebecca:
    That's downright convoluted. Firstlyyou're committing a category error by
    comparing Arete and Dialectics. If ANYTHING, the Classic/Romantic split
    seems to come from Pirsig's social conceptions of the two and that
    they correspond to SQ and DQ (respectively). They don't equate to SQ and
    DQ, but Classical movements more toward static quality patterns whereas the
    Romantic movements are characterized by a greater level of dynamic quality.

    Bo:
    Conclusion:
    Aretê is social all right, but static social value had a dynamic
    "pre-social" component; something about Aretê that always
    eluded the Ancients. Nowadays the 4th. level has its pre-
    intellectual "something" that constantly eludes us and my
    "warning" is that we must limit the fourth level to its obvious static
    value, the S/O one and see its dynamism as what urged Pirsig to
    create the Quality perspective.

    Rebecca:
    Why is it that every argument that is made on this discussion group must
    somehow be twisted and contorted to fit your theory? You misconstrued my
    question to begin with. Perhaps you didn't understand what I was trying to
    get at. Now I've given you my impressions of the situation and you should
    understand that in no way do I agree with your assertions of Subject/Object
    Logic being the fourth level.

    Regards,
    Rebecca
    moq_discuss mailing list
    Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
    http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
    Archives:
    http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
    http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 06 2005 - 21:14:57 GMT