From: Jonathan B. Marder (jonathan.marder@newmail.net)
Date: Sun Aug 31 2003 - 16:35:48 BST
Hi Scott, Platt, Sam, Bo, All:
Scott
> This is why I say that the S/O divide should be seen as a case of the
> DQ/SQ divide. It's too ingrained in us to be called a *static* pattern
> of value.
Platt
How "ingrained" something is has no effect on its being a static
pattern. The laws of physics are pretty well ingrained yet still static
patterns of the inorganic level. But, the S/O divide, if we agree it is
a static social pattern, can be said to be seen as "a case of the DQ/sq
divide, or perhaps less abstractly, a case (pattern) in the MOQ moral
hierarchy.
Jonathan says, I dissent on both counts:
1. "Ingrained" and "static" are synonyms, both meaning resistant to change.
2. I don't see the S/O divide as a social pattern. It is an (intellectual)
description of perception AT ALL LEVELS.
IMHO, what Pirsig has done is to LIBERATE the S/O divide from a metaphysical
straightjacket. According to my understanding of the quality idea, the S/O
division is no longer a fixed, absolute dichotomy that defines the bounds of
reality; it is a dynamically-assigned division that can help describe
experience.
Jonathan
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 : Sun Aug 31 2003 - 16:37:58 BST