Hello LS,
RISKYBIZ9@aol.com wrote:
>>>>>>"
> AM I making any sense? If you agree, tell me . If you disagree show me what
> you disagree with. If you find me confusing, challenge me to clarify. And if
> you find me wrong, please help to correct me. Let's take up Diana's challenge
> though and openly confront each other...........<<<<<<<<<<
Carmen: Other LS people (whose names I have promised not to mention for a while,
ought to take Roger's quote into serious examination).Before I jump in and
comment in this fine quote, let us remind ourselves what we were discussing to
begin with:"""""""
"With reference to the examples given in LILA, explain dynamic and
static quality and the relationship between them."
Carmen: I wanted to make a reference to one of the first posts of the month by
Rich Pretty, but for all the 'casta~nuelas de mi abuela', I cant find the exact
place. However, fear not LS friends, I would try to reproduce his words and then
take it from there. Rich wrote something that went like this:
...There is a division, one is SOM which represents static Quality, which is in
itself divided(mentioned something about two boxes), and over and above Dynamic
Quality stands. It can't be defined, but we 'know' is there.
Carmen: Then someone brought in another fine quote from Anthony's essay :
""In the MOQ, experience is pure Quality which gives rise to the creation
> of intellectual patterns...... Among these patterns is the intellectual
pattern
> that says 'there is an external world of things out there which are
> independent of intellectual patterns'.......... And in this highest
quality
> intellectual pattern, external objects appear historically before
> intellectual patterns... But this highest quality intellectual pattern
> itself comes before the external world, not after, as is commonly
> presumed by the materialist." (Pirsig in letter to Anthony McWatt)
Carmen: Dynamic and static Quality and the relationship between them......
The way I understand Pirsig's Philosophy is that in order to perceive Quality,
let it be static, let it be Dynamic is 'by perceiving VALUE'. Value is the common
denominator, if you don't perceive the VALUE you won't see Quality. The next
thing is. What is value? (I am not going tolook in the dictionary right now, I am
just going to pull on my natural resources, which I understand can be very
limited). Value is something we learn to detect within our Culture. A culture is
a group of people who share the same values. The best physical explanation I can
find of these, is to direct you to Anthony's Essay, and please read the example
about the question of weather or not it is Moral or Immoral for someone to eat
red meat. There is a Pirsignian Logic of events on that example, which
illustrates very clearly how a VALUE (in this case red meat) is PERCEIVED (By a
Pirsignian Observer, say yourself, and a Hindu) culturally.
Value = something which you BELIEVE is real, does not stand independently like
TRUTH for example. Values are embedded in the MYTHS, in the Culture in the
GESTALT. Pirsig's Philosophy tells me: LOOK BEHIND AND BEYOND THAT. Don't let the
LIGHT blind you.
Another very important reference I have found in Anthony's Essay is where he
talks about the moral CODES at each individual level. (Individual level=
inorganic, biological, social, intellectual....) There is a mention about the
fact that the CODES at each level SEEM to be in contradiction as you move up the
levels. Take for example, as mentioned on the essay... at the Biological Level to
be promiscuous ( a moral code) is a good thing, it leads to better organisms,
but at the social level, let's take the family, to be promiscuous is a very BAD
thing. You see, the same CODE does not apply at the biological and the social
level the same way. My natural next question is, and here I would like to all of
us help each other to find the answer....WHAT ABOUT THE INTELLECTUAL CODES?. What
are they, and how are they APPLIED?
Excused me LS, but now I am totally confused. Somewhere I read:
TRUTH STANDS ALONE, it is independent. Then SOMEWHERE else I read: TIME CHANGES
TRUTH. I think I need a brake.
Would someone please talk to me about the CODES?
Last but not least:
It has been a great 'posts of posts' month. And let me leave you with some words
I found in 'The art of the Novel' by the Genius of Milan Kundera:
"Los poetas no inventan los poemas
El poema esta en alguna parte ahi detras
Desde hace mucho mucho tiempo esta ahi
El poeta no hace sino descubrirlo
Jan Sjacel"
Translation:
"" The poets do not invent poems
the poem is there somewhere behind
From long long time ago it is there
The poet doesn't have to but discover it
Jan Sjacel "
[I apologize for the translation, my original book is in spanish.].
Now, read the poem again in English and switch the word 'Poem' by 'QUALITY', and
switch the word 'The Poet' by your own name. 'The poets' with philosophers and
poems with 'reality'. Then you end up with:
"Philosophers do not invent DQ or sQ
Quality is there somewhere behind
From long long time ago it is there
Carmen (Fraedrus, you) doesn't have to but discoverer it"
Don't forget to use your own name in this exercise.
Enough for now,
All my best,
Carmen.
>
>
> MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org
MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:44 GMT