From: Paul Turner (paul@turnerbc.co.uk)
Date: Fri Aug 05 2005 - 12:10:15 BST
Bo,
Paul quoted ZMM:
>> "Man is the measure of all things." Yes, that's what he is saying
>> about Quality. Man is not the source of all things, as the subjective
>> idealists would say. Nor is he the passive observer of all things, as
>> the objective idealists and materialists would say. The Quality which
>> creates the world emerges as a relationship between man and his
>> experience." [ZMM, p383]
Bo replied:
>Here the MOQ must be applied. "Man" is all levels and (new)
>Quality emerges as a relationship between the highest static level
>and the dynamism that always strives to escape it. After the
>social level this process necessarily became "man-centered", but
>not "mind-centered". (in a modern idealist sense).
Paul: What you are saying here is a little unclear to me but it seems you
have contradicted yourself. You tried to pin some kind of proto-idealism on
the Sophists but are now (seemingly) accepting that they were right that
"man is the measure of all things." Now this phrase is what Pirsig
deliberately CONTRASTS with man as "the source of all things, as the
SUBJECTIVE idealists would say" and also with man as "the passive observer
of all things, as the OBJECTIVE idealists and materialists would say."
>However, I am dubious about the Sophists' role (in a MOQ
>context) if they represented some higher or purer Quality (Aretê).
>What happened in Greece was intellect (classic mind) emerging
>out of society (its romantic origin). "Man the measure versus truth
>the measure ..." bacame intellects subject/object distinction (still
>is).
Paul: But if the Sophists were part of the emergence of the intellectual
level - as you now accept - and if they held a position which is contrasted,
by Pirsig at least, with the emerging subjective/objective dichotomy of
Plato, then what can we conclude? Either you accept what most of us have
been saying all along - that the intellectual level is not identical with
SOM - or be forced to conclude that your mysterious proto-fifth-level
emerged at the same time as the intellectual level. Your only other option
is to reject Pirsig's description of the Sophists' position with respect to
S/O whilst accepting the rest of his description of this period. This means
your "unearthing of the true MOQ" has started to erode the validity of ZMM
as well as everything else. You'll be down to one paragraph soon!
Regards
Paul
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 : Fri Aug 05 2005 - 12:38:12 BST