Andrew_Russell/FS/KSG@ksg.harvard.edu
Thu, 23 Jul 1998 04:52:36 +0100
Hi all -
I've been lurking simply because I dont have the time or energy or
brainwaves to get too involved in discussions. Seem to be good
discussions,
all of them, with a few exceptions.
Platt recently wrote:
> I quote from Lila, chapter 9:
>
>"In his book Phaedrus had tried to save Quality from metaphysics by
>refusing to define it, by placing it outside the dialectical chess board.
>Anything that is undefined is outside metaphysics, since metaphysics can
>only function with defined terms. If you can't define it you can't argue
>about it."
>
>And that would be a disaster for the Lila Squad.
>
>Platt
>
>
It would be a disaster because we are trying to use one medium to
explain another. It's like talking about jazz. It's like describing the
taste of wine. The Lila Squad IS a disaster, in a sense, because we are
all trying to understand a metaphysics that, at its core, transcends and
includes our modern, rational way of interpreting the phenomena we have
called the universe. this is the problem I had with Struan a while
back, if some of you remember. He wouldn't argue with me because I was
speaking trans-rationally, which he saw only as irrational.
We are talking about Quality, that which is defined as "cannot be
defined," and we are viewing it all through the eye of Mind, instead of
through the eye of Spirit. Contemplation. Direct intuition. We all know
what it is but we cant tell someone else what it is. Talking about it is
like sketching a bird in flight, or like digging a lake with a
toothpick. misplaced. doomed to failure.
A good lens to view this problem of the stranglehold of rationality is
via the work of Ken Wilber. I say this to this group every now and
again, but clearly no one who writes frequently is familiar with his
work. There's a couple of URL's I can send if there's interest. The
clarity is amazing.....
Anyway, SQ/DQ split. Here's my take on it.
Key term is evolution. Dynamic Quality can be seen as the act, process
of evolution. Evolution can be seen as the breaking (transcending and
including) of patterns that already exist. Be it at the sub-atomic
level, social level, personal level, biological level, whatever. If
you've got a pattern, then you evolve out of it - or transcend it while
including its useful features - (take monarchies and horse-drawn
carraiges for the lesser evolved and social democracies and Jaguars as
more evolved), then this is an act where P's DQ is at work. Essential. I
havent read up on Lila and ZMM in a while (Wilber is too crystal clear
to put down), but it seems like
DQ = evolution transcending and including, undefinable physically or
vebally since it is a manifestation of Spirit which is always already
everywhere and canot be reduced to physical or verbal terms
SQ = that which is, and which can be defined, and analyzed, and
therefore subjected to moral/ethical/rational tests, and therefore be
transcended.
If you see the universe as Spirit unfolding, in a perpetual process of
self-recognition, where all is Spirit, this makes it clearer. All is
Spirit. Finite pieces are finite pieces that come and go. But what lies
behind it, what lies behind you and I and the birds and the trees, this
is unmistakably clear, ever-present, eternal Spirit (or whatever
religious name you want to call it). I believe this is what Pirsig calls
Quality.
Rich sources for interpreting Pirsig's work lie outside of his work
itself. It all depends how you look at it.
Anyway, that's my take on it.
Hope you are all transcending and including.
Andy
-- homepage - http://www.moq.org/lilasquad unsubscribe/queries - mailto:lilasquad@moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:28 CEST