From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Mon Sep 01 2003 - 10:21:22 BST
Hi all
Maybe the SO divide could begin at the biological level,
in the operation of instincts, but I think not, early human culture clearly
shows very little divide between self and world, all that my soul is that of
a panther stuff, the SO divide gets going when the culture starts to
alienate and separate subject-man and life-world. I recommend Chris Macann's
book at www.onlineoriginals.com called Being and Becoming and is about the
evolution of consciousness from a phenomenological point of view.
David Morey
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Buchanan" <DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 11:17 PM
Subject: RE: MD liberals, conservatives & suffering
> Hi Platt, Scott, Sam, Bo, All:
>
> I should have changed the thread name. I'd like to focus on SOM and the
"S/O
> divide", but I'm not sure what to call it. Anyway,...
>
> Scott said:
> Where Pirsig goes wrong, in my opinion, is that, while SOM is a high
quality
> intellectual static pattern of value, the S/O divide is not, and he does
not
> make that distinction.
>
> Platt replied:
> Are you saying the S/O divide is not a "high quality" intellectual
> static pattern, or simply not an intellectual static pattern? If the
> latter, would you say the S/O divide is a social level static pattern?
> After all, it is essential to the structure of language which most
> agree belongs in the social level. ...I think you're on to something.
>
> dmb says:
> I think the S/O divide does preceed the 4th level's SOM. Its a third level
> assumption that we've inherited with language itself. Its built right in.
I
> don't want to complicate the issue, but I can see how this way of seeing
the
> world is even built into our biological structures like eyeballs, ear
drums
> and most notably, skin. :-) In any case, I think that the S/O divide was
one
> of those unexamined assumptions taken for granted even by those who
> participated in the scientific revolution and enlightenment and was
thereby
> formalized into a metaphysical assertion.
>
> The interesting thing to note, I think, is that the MOQ has done the same
> thing. It formalizes third level assumptions too. And that's how it has to
> be, according to the MOQ. All intellectual constructs are culturally
> derived. All 4th level patterns can find their origins in the 3rd level.
The
> difference between SOM and the MOQ is that Pirsig taps into a different
> current. The third level values that support the MOQ are from the mystical
> currents within the culture. Sam, Scott and Platt each hint at this...
>
> Scott said:
> Only in peak experiences is the divide momentarily overcome.
>
> Platt said:
> Or momentarily overcome in DQ experience prior to any divide. Same
> thing in different words.
>
> Sam said:
> I'm coming to think that SOM as such only really kicked in after the
> scientific revolution and - as you point out - it doesn't really apply to
> those intellectual systems (often neo-Platonic) which emphasise
> participation. (As did medieval Christian theology, in parts, of course).
>
> dmb says:
> Peak experiences. DQ experience. Participation. Yep. We're talking about
> mysticism, a deeply submerged stream in our mythos. The current that
Pirsig
> builds upon is sort of hidden and suppressed, but its been part of things
> all along. He says this explicitly about American culture, but I think its
> safe to apply it more broadly to the West. In fact, I think we can see
both
> currents in our central mythology. The usual reading is SOMish insofar as
it
> has God and Nature as seperate from Man, but the same myths can be read
> another way. We can see the loss of original participation in Adam's exile
> from Eden and we can see a re-integration or final participation in
Christ's
> union with God. This reading depicts our seperation from God as a crisis
to
> be overcome rather than a permanent feature of the order of things. I
don't
> know if I'm connecting the dots well enough, but all I mean to say is that
> the difference between SOM and the MOQ can be traced back to differences
at
> the third level. I'd add that this difference is a part of the
> static/Dynamic dance, with the mystical tradition periodically breaking
> through to refresh things.
>
> Thanks,
> dmb
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
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 : Mon Sep 01 2003 - 10:33:39 BST