Dave Thomas (dlt44@ipa.net)
Fri, 5 Dec 1997 16:47:06 +0100
Bo, Mark, Magnus
> But deep down
> it is my conviction that the MOQ is a revival of something
> arch-religious: namely that EVERYTHING IS GOD, and that existence -
> ourselves included - are expressions of GOD. See how it matches the
> everything-is-good-and-existence-is- levels-of good.
> > I've been exploring the idea that there exists a level above the
> > intellectual, which seeks freedom from it. This strata concerns itself
> > with faith, and I've been calling it Spiritual Values. Mystical
> > experiences would be considered spiritual values. They certainly are
> > not social value nor are they intellectual.
> >
> > What are your first impressions of this idea?
>
> It's been up for discussion before here on TLS. Not exactly the term
> "Spiritual Values" but some similar. First of all, I think that all
> levels have no idea about any higher levels. Inorganic patterns are
> not aware of organic manipulation and so on. So, we wouldn't
> intellectually be able to see any higher levels.
>
> Second, since this higher level is not definable, Mystical experiences
> would hardly be mystic if they were defined, it is not a static level,
> hence Dynamic Quality mediating intellectual patterns.
>
> Third, my impressions are that people suggesting a higher level don't
> want it to be static in the first place. It seems to be the same kind of
> misguided reaction to intellectual patterns as the hippies' reaction to
> social patterns.
>
Looking at the Subject Object Data Values paper on LS site I would say Pirsig
would put GOD in the conceptually unknown catagory which would agree with what
Mangus is saying. This could be seen to correspond with Kant's transcendent
idea "We all live in the question of God" which so shocked the world and
finally lead to Nietzsche's experience as "the death of God" But I think Pirig
dodges the bullet nicely in three ways.
1. In the conceptually unknown section he goes on to say that just because an
idea is in this state does not mean it is valueless. So the question of God is
with us, will remain with us, is beyond our power of reason, but is not
without value.
2. To all the worlds religions he says, in so much as you establish static
social patterns that conform to MoQ and are evolving toward a greater good;
you are morally right. In so much as you are so inflexible and rigid that you
allow no moral progress you are pattern of low quality and most likely will die.
3. He moves morality and ethics from a subset way down the philosophical pike
to a primary ingredient of the base.
Then finally he restores the fragmented disections of SoM to a whole which
reunites man, nature, and universe in such a way that the Gaia Hypothesis
appears more believable as do most relegions that claim God created and is
everything. But for man the question is still out and will be out until God
decides to resolve the issue.
Dave.
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:25 CEST