Hi Cozens:
> If quality is defined as the pre-intellectual perception of reality
> and that reality is dependant on an individuals perception, why
> does it follow that quality is good or God ? isn't it just relative
> to what that individuals expectation of reality was.
>From LILA, Chapter 5:
"Quality is indivisible, undefinable and unknowable in the sense that
there is a knower and a known . . ."
That's as close to a description of God as I can imagine. Neither
Quality nor God can be defined because there's no way for us to get
outside of either. As for reality being "dependent on an individual
perception," you are describing the metaphysics of Idealism, not the
MOQ. No reasonable person would suggest that my perception of the
planes crashing into the Trade Center towers is the same as the reality
of the planes crashing into the towers. Perceptions don't kill 6,000
people. As a metaphysics, Idealism fails the "common sense" test. Do
chickens lay eggs only when someone is looking? Nobody thinks so.
But--and it is a fairly big but--there's another form of Idealism of which
the MOQ could be accused of taking part. That is the assumption that
something exists to explain the world that will forever lie beyond the full
comprehension of us mere mortals--Kant's "Noumena," Wilber's
"Spirit," Whitehead's "dim apprehension," Pirsig's "Quality." Ever since
Darwin put the kibosh on religion and science defined men as naked
apes signifying nothing in a purposeless universe, we have sought
solace. There's plenty of human motive for inventing a force out there
who cares what happens to us--something that's working to make
things better. Whether the MOQ fits that form of Idealism is still an open
question for me even though I lean heavily to the side that believes its
explanatory power gives it the edge over other attempts to reveal what's
really going on in this old world of ours.
As for the scientific worldview, the stumbling block for me in fully
accepting it has always been its inability to explain values and beauty.
Since the MOQ does a nice job with both while never challenging what
science accomplishes its own realm, I think the MOQ is the better deal.
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:34 BST