From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Sun Nov 02 2003 - 22:24:26 GMT
Scott:Yes, I say we are simply changing
experience, that using abstract concepts is -- in a way -- moving us closer
to Reality.
DM: When Pirsig suggests we use MOQ instead of SOM this is exactly
what he is doing. But if ideas=reality I assume you are a Platonist, so
you why don't you reject the whole of Pirsig?
Scott:What abstraction has to offer is its primoridal existence. That --
since in
> our nominalist age we tend to denigrate abstract ideas in favor of
kickable
> stones -- we should learn to think in reverse, that stones exist in order
to
> express ideas, not that ideas exist to describe stones. (Eventually, via
the
> logic of contradictory identity, this last too needs deconstruction, but
one
> step at a time.)
>
DM:Well, in that case maybe I am ahead of you!
regards
David M
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott R" <jse885@spinn.net>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: MD Self-consciousness
> David,
>
>
>
> [Scott prev:]> > My objection to Pirsig's response is his treating "an
> abstraction" as
> > > somehow inferior to "concrete". This is the nominalism of Pirsig that
I
> > > object to. Basically, Pirsig is adopting the basic nominalist
> orientation
> > > that the more "sense perceptible" something is, the more real it is,
in
> > > the style of Dr. Johnson refuting Berkeley by kicking a stone. Now he
> (Pirsig}
> > > would expand that orientation to argue that "art and morality and even
> > > religious mysticism" belong in the concrete, and hence "more real"
(and
> so
> > > distinguishes the MOQ from materialism), but would deny that to
> > > "abstraction".
>
> [David:]> I think you are very wrong here. Pirsig is clearly
> > saying to treat something as ONLY/exclusively an abstraction is
> > inadequate.
>
> And I am saying, why is treating something only/exclusively as an
> abstraction considered inadequate? That is, why this presupposition that
> abstraction is less important than kickable stones?
>
> Pirsig wants to talk about reality-quality and as soon
> > as this happens you have to start using abstract concepts, he knows
> > this well, he talks about how SOM cuts things up one way, how this
> dominates
> > out thinking, and he suggests the MOQ as a different way to analyse our
> > experience.
>
> Yes, Pirsig is a nominalist. He sees that "you have to start using
abstract
> concepts" to "analyse our experience", and worries that in doing we are
> somehow stepping back from experience. I say we are simply changing
> experience, that using abstract concepts is -- in a way -- moving us
closer
> to Reality.
>
> > If something is just abstract and has no effect on
> > reality-experience-existence why
> > would it interest us?
> > DQ has to be linked to
> > creativity/mysticism/imagination if we
> > are going to move from an SQ/DQ distinction to talk about how the two
> > interact to produce this existence-world. Whilst I think what you have
to
> say can add
> > to our understanding of the MOQ I do not see that it either goes beyond
it
> or
> > contradicts it, rather it fleshes it out. What do you think abstraction
> has to offer us
> > that contradicts the MOQ, I can't see it, maybe if we can get to grips
> with this I can change
> > your mind or you can change mine.
>
> What abstraction has to offer is its primoridal existence. That -- since
in
> our nominalist age we tend to denigrate abstract ideas in favor of
kickable
> stones -- we should learn to think in reverse, that stones exist in order
to
> express ideas, not that ideas exist to describe stones. (Eventually, via
the
> logic of contradictory identity, this last too needs deconstruction, but
one
> step at a time.)
>
> - Scott
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
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 Nov 02 2003 - 22:40:17 GMT