From: Scott Roberts (jse885@earthlink.net)
Date: Sat Nov 27 2004 - 14:40:21 GMT
Steve,
[Scott prev:] > > One can apply the same logic to DQ and SQ, but if one
does, one gets
> > something different from the treatment of these as given in the MOQ.
> > The MOQ tends to idolize DQ at the expense of SQ, for example by
assuming
> > that the mystical goal is to experience pure DQ by putting all SQ to
sleep.
> > But the logic of contradictory identity will see that as going off the
> > Middle Way. DQ and SQ are contradictory identities, so it makes no
sense to
> > speak of "pure [DQ] experience" which is then SQ-ized by intellect.
Rather,
> > DQ/SQ interaction is what makes experience happen.
> >
>
[Steve:]> I'm not sure that what you are saying about the logic of
contradictory
> identity is inconsistent with the MOQ. I think it is a mistake to say
> that the MOQ speaks of '"pure [DQ] experience" which is then SQ-ized by
> intellect.' Such a role for intellect in creating SQ sounds like Scott
> Robert's MOQ rather than Pirsig's. I think the MOQ says that Quality is
> pure experience which can be analyzed with a DQ/SQ distinction that
> serves better than an objective/subjective one. DQ is not pure
> experience but rather the leading edge of experience.
[Scott:] There seems to be some confusion here between Pirsig's view, my
charcterization of Pirsig's view, and my view. When I said: " "pure [DQ]
experience" which is then SQ-ized by intellect", I meant to be
characterizing Pirsig's view, as in:
"A "dim apprehension of he knows not what" gets him off the stove
Dynamically. Later he generates static patterns of thought to explain the
situation." [Ch. 9]
"..James had condensed this description to a single sentence: "There must
always be a discrepancy between concepts and reality, because the former
are static and discontinuous while the latter is dynamic and flowing." Here
James had chosen exactly the same words Phaedrus had used for the basic
subdivision of the [MOQ]." [Ch. 29]
and when I characterized Pirsig's view with "the mystical goal is to
experience pure DQ by putting all SQ to sleep." I was referring to:
"The [MOQ] suggests...there is another [solution to insanity]. This
solution is to dissolve *all* static patterns, both sane and insane, and
find the base of reality, Dynamic Quality, that is independent of all of
them." [Ch. 30]
My impression is that Pirsig thinks of both "pure experience" and "the
leading edge of experience" as DQ. If I'm wrong on this, let me know where
he distinguishes them.
My view, which differs from the MOQ, is that DQ is never independent of SQ.
Rather, DQ and SQ always exist only insofar as they oppose each other as
they constitute each other, that is, they follow the form of contrdictory
identities. And so I reject the concept of "pure experience". All
experience is always a DQ/SQ opposition, which is best exemplified by our
experience of intellect.
- Scott
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 27 2004 - 14:43:16 GMT