Horse (horse@wasted.demon.nl)
Wed, 27 May 1998 03:01:58 +0100
Diana and LS
DIANA:
"I don't think that A OR NOT A is the same as subject and object -- or
if you want to be
minimalist ME OR NOT ME. A/NOT A is just dualism. ME/NOT ME is a
specific type of
dualism. I suggested before that it is the mother of all dualism."
If I may quote Pirsig:
"Metaphysics is what Aristotle called the First Philosophy. It's a
collection of the most
general statements of a hierarchical structure of thought." (Lila -
P79. - Black Swan)
I think that there is a fundamental difference here between A OR NOT A
and ME/NOT ME.
The former is descriptive of and central to SO Metaphysics (SOM) whilst
the latter is
descriptive of SO Consciousness (SOC). Also, A OR NOT A is fundamental
to the position
that is taken by ANY exclusivist metaphysics and is the most general
statment that can
be made about this form of metaphysics. What we have been referring to
as SOM is an
example of an exclusivist metaphysics. In addition, A OR NOT A does not
just refer to
dualisms as there are some forms of dualism that are inclusive. One of
the traits of an
exclusivist metaphysics is that it is also excludes in another way. It
excludes VALUE. It
purports to be value free and this, I think, is fundamental to the
postion that Pirsig took in
both Lila and ZMM. To exclude value is to exclude experience and any
form of ethical or
moral position. I think it is important that any definition of SOM
includes some reference to
the idea that a Subject Object Metaphysics does not admit to the
existence of Value as a
primary part of the foundation of reality.
DIANA:
"The problem with A/NOT A philosophies are that
1. There is no middle, everything is either black or white, there's no
grey
2. Something cannot be two things at the same time. (And of course I'm
going to bring up that old favorite, the dual slit experiment.)"
The above describes SOM and its relatives. Something is or it is not.
Within SOM that
which is being referred to is Subject or it is not Subject. If it is not
Subject it MUST be
Object. No other choice exists. (Insert exclusivist dualistic pairs of
your choice)
DIANA:
"The problem with ME/NOT ME philosophies is
1. Value is reduced to _mere_ opinion."
I'm not sure if this is the case with ME/NOT ME systems as this appears
to be SOC rather
than SOM (as I said above) but it is certainly the case for all A OR NOT
A systems of
which I am aware.
DIANA:
"It's tempting to go for the A/NOT A answer, because it's simpler and
it's easier to fit ME/NOT ME inside A/NOT A than vice versa."
As far as I can see (and I may be wrong) A OR NOT A subsumes ME/NOT ME.
The former
is a rationalisation and formalisation of the latter into a systematic
and logical thought
system as per the Aristotelian/ Cartesian systems. MoQ subsumes both and
includes
Value as a primary requisite.
DIANA:
"But if that's what Pirsig was really after why didn't he call it the
Metaphysics of the
Excluded Middle, or the Either/Or metaphysics?"
I can't speak for Pirsig, but it would seem that the term Subject Object
Metaphysics is one
that is accepted and used to describe the system of thought that he is
attempting to
rectify. The above aren't.
DIANA
"Why didn't he write a book about fuzzy logic or Zen contradictions?
It's not that the MoQ
is inconsistent with these things, but these aren't the main focus. He
called it the subject-
object metaphysics, if subject and object isn't the dividing line, we're
in a lot of trouble."
I'm not sure about Zen contradictions but _fuzzification_ is a process
whereby traditional
western thinking (SOM?) is expanded into be more inclusive view of
reality - see my last
post regarding the extension principle. The parallels are striking
between the efforts of Lotfi
Zadeh and Robert Pirsig even though Zadeh was working within a subset of
the western
system - Mathematics and Logic. Fuzzy logic is one small a part of the
gradual process of
fuzzification that is now occuring in the West. Pirsigs plans are far
more grandiose than
Zadeh's.
I'm not saying that Pirsig was focusing on these things. The MoQ is
greater than Zadeh's
work in that it is about a revised, updated and enornously expanded
understanding of the
whole of reality - starting with Quality/Value as the underlying basis
of reality - not just one
small part. This view of reality is inclusive of SOM whereby Pirsig
concludes that subjects
and objects are created by Value. Thus they are the same thing -
Patterns of Value as part
of a stratified structure.
As for the rest of the above, Pirsig did not talk of THE SOM but made
reference to SOM
form ( _A_ subject object Metaphysics). The split does not have to be
limited merely to
Subjects and Objects but would include any Valueless and Exclusivist
Metaphysics.
Reference to Subject and Object is Pirsigs starting point where A OR NOT
A is an
unstated but inherent and essential assumption.
DIANA:
"We're getting far too abstract here. The MOQ supports A AND NOT A? I
think we need
some examples."
I don't want to get too far into this at the moment as it strays away
from defining SOM but
as I said above, where Value creates Subject and Object, the two are
unified under the
collective idea of Value/Quality. This is stated by Pirsig. One
interpretation is that the
unification of SOM systems of thought destroys the A OR NOT A
exclusivity and
introduces the idea of A AND NOT A. I will develope this idea in further
PROGRAM
discussions, where relevant.
DIANA:
"Bodvar wrote
> Yes, I buy Diana's definition, but am a little reluctant re. Horse's
> minimalistic 'A OR NOT A' which only says that this thing over
> here is different from the one over there, but does NOT indicate that
> one phenomenon is in a compartment totally different from the other.
Right, that's my problem with it too."
As I have stated above, in the context of SOM this is probably the most
basic statement
that can be made about this form of Metaphysics. It is also rarely
stated as it is absolutely
fundamental.
"Making history, it turned out, was quite easy.
It was what got written down.
It was as simple as that!"
Sir Sam Vimes.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:15 CEST