Hi Kilian & Bodvar, & all,
For me its seems that the "argument" comes from the question "what is
the purpose, or value, of MoQ?" From what I've read so far on this site, and
granted i am new, it seems that the majority opinion is that the MoQ is the
Truth, with a capital T. MoQ is the real way the universe works, and SOM is
terribly wrong. But I don't subscribe to this. It seems to me that MoQ is a
very good model of reality, one that has more quality than SOM, one that is
more inclusive and illuminating. But its just that a model, the best myth
for our times. As Pirsig says in ZAMM "Everything is an analogy." Every
thing is an analogy! So what's the purpose of this analogy, this MoQ? It
seems to me to be a rational path up the static mountain of reality to reach
the summit of DQ. A road map, a traveler's companion, up the path of
spiritual development, using the intellectual tool of reason and logic. But
if you stay in the valley of discourse, of intellectual debate, of
philosophy, then sadly you miss the whole point. The experience of Dynamic
Quality itself, the experience Pirsig had, the experience mystics say they
had.
Malbin
Kilian Betlach wrote:
> Howdy all:
>
> As the battle rages concerning what mysticism is along with its general
> validity, I find myself overwhelmed with the feeling that can only be
> described as: "so what?" I may be extremely thick-headed, but I don't
> understand what all the fuss is about.
>
> I think it would be a very difficult task indeed to find a group of
> people (even the proverbial hard-nose scientist) who did not beleive
> that there was a realm of existence that is beyond and independent of
> the ability of "thought" to conceive, explain, or visualize it. The
> simple fact that so many people believe in a some form of God/Higher
> being testifies to this. And let's not get bogged down with particulars
> and the splitting of hairs -- mysticsm is a lot like the Quality
> described in ZAMM in that we all no what it is, we just get caught when
> we try to specifically tie it down with a definition.
>
> And yet, mysticism isn't the whole thing. Anyone who affirms this
> either wasn't paying attention to Pirsig's basic split of Quality in
> LILA or finds it invalid. Fully half of reality is DQ -- the mystical
> side of reality, the realm of inspiration, change, etc. The other half,
> and no less important is SQ -- the side of physical reality, stability,
> etc. Obviously, both are needed. They are two halves of the same
> reality-coin.
>
> Having said that, I will cautiously contend that to approach this forum
> on a purely mystical basis has potentially less value than to do so in a
> rational, logical manner. This has to do with the "sharability" of a
> mystical contention. It being something so personal and germane to the
> individual, I feel that attempts to express it without adhering to the
> confines of logic and language would be to give nothing to the squad as
> a whole. Indeed, a tue mystic would say that such an event is doomed to
> failure, because as soon as you use the static latch of language
> whatever you're attempting to describe has been perverted.
>
> So could we maybe go back to discussing this month's PROGRAM which IMHO
> is the msot important one that has come about since I've been a member
> of the squad? A mystic aspect of reality exists, who's really argue
> against that without saying that the concept of Quality is not valid?
> But who else would really contend that rational thought and logical
> expression are of no value within a discussion group that exists within
> language? What are you guys really arguing about? And why?
>
> Kilian
>
> homepage - http://www.moq.org
> queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
> unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
> body of email
-- Malbin Mendoza Mechanical Design EngineerPH: 217/438-2256 FAX: 217/438-6157
homepage - http://www.moq.org queries - mailto:moq@moq.org unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:44 BST