Re: MD Lila's Child

From: johnny moral (
Date: Fri Aug 08 2003 - 21:05:35 BST

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD Lila's Child"

    sq: This hits the nail on the head in all respects in my view.

    There was a nail?

    >Subject: Re: MD Lila's Child
    >Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 11:24:24 EDT
    >Hi Platt and Squonk
    >This is a good thread! If I may throw in some supporting Pirsig quotes?
    >We agree on a lot, Squonk. But here I must question your "artistic
    >creations of intellect"
    >So, artistic creation doesn't come from intellect but from that sense
    >within each of us that responds to the creative force of DQ. It's known
    >to the us as a sudden flash of insight, the light bulb going off, the
    >surprising connection we make between two or three heretofore unrelated
    >To add weight to Squonk's aesthetic interpretation of intellect, but to
    >clarify the DQ-SQ relationship at work that Platt alludes to, check out
    >this passage from ZMM:
    >"Poincaré then hypothesized that this selection is made by what he
    >called the "subliminal self," an entity that corresponds exactly with
    >what Phĉdrus called preintellectual awareness. The subliminal self,
    >Poincaré said, looks at a large number of solutions to a problem, but
    >only the interesting ones break into the domain of consciousness.
    >Mathematical solutions are selected by the subliminal self on the basis
    >of "mathematical beauty," of the harmony of numbers and forms, of
    >geometric elegance. "This is a true esthetic feeling which all
    >mathematicians know," Poincaré said, "but of which the profane are so
    >ignorant as often to be tempted to smile." But it is this harmony, this
    >beauty, that is at the center of it all.
    >Poincaré made it clear that he was not speaking of romantic beauty, the
    >beauty of appearances which strikes the senses. He meant classic beauty,
    >which comes from the harmonious order of the parts, and which a pure
    >intelligence can grasp, which gives structure to romantic beauty and
    >without which life would be only vague and fleeting, a dream from which
    >one could not distinguish one's dreams because there would be no basis
    >for making the distinction. It is the quest of this special classic
    >beauty, the sense of harmony of the cosmos, which makes us choose the
    >facts most fitting to contribute to this harmony. It is not the facts but
    >the relation of things that results in the universal harmony that is the
    >sole objective reality.
    >What guarantees the objectivity of the world in which we live is that
    >this world is common to us with other thinking beings. Through the
    >communications that we have with other men we receive from them
    >ready-made harmonious reasonings. We know that these reasonings do not
    >come from us and at the same time we recognize in them, because of their
    >harmony, the work of reasonable beings like ourselves. And as these
    >reasonings appear to fit the world of our sensations, we think we may
    >infer that these reasonable beings have seen the same thing as we; thus
    >it is that we know we haven't been dreaming. It is this harmony, this
    >quality if you will, that is the sole basis for the only reality we can
    >ever know"
    >Seems to me we're able to draw upon a lot more than a limited
    >repertoire of patterns to express ourselves, especially if you think of
    >individual words as individual patterns.
    >I think "repertoire" is closely linked with the "analogues" described in
    >the following passage; therefore we seem to have a cultural and
    >individual repertoire with which to respond to Quality. Is this how you
    >see it Squonk?
    >squonk: Very much so. I like the term repertoire for its artistic flavour.
    >All patterns, inorganic, organic, social and intellectual share a living
    >relationship with DQ - and the best coherent relationships have high
    >"Men invent responses to Quality, and among these responses is an
    >understanding of what they themselves are. You know something and then
    >the Quality stimulus hits and then you try to define the Quality
    >stimulus, but to define it all you've got to work with is what you know.
    >So your definition is made up of what you know. It's an analogue to what
    >you already know. It has to be. It can't be anything else. And the
    >mythos grows this way. By analogies to what is known before. The mythos
    >is a building of analogues upon analogues upon analogues." ZMM Ch28
    >Hello Paul and Platt,
    >This hits the nail on the head in all respects in my view. It is the
    >aesthetic that drives our intellectual patterns - the Quality of their

    The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*

    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 08 2003 - 21:06:26 BST