From: Joe (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Thu Oct 09 2003 - 16:48:05 BST
Great!
----- Original Message -----
From: <skutvik@online.no>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 12:03 AM
Subject: Re: MD MOQ and idealism
> Paul and All
>
> 3 Oct. You commented:
> > I agree with Dan, this is a key point in Pirsig's thought - explained
> > in detail in ZMM but not so much in Lila which concentrates on the
> > application of the MOQ's evolutionary model to an interpretation of
> > history. Personally, it was when I considered the relationship between
> > idealism and the MOQ that Pirsig's ideas really hit home. I'm not sure
> > how clearly I can explain my understanding but I'll give it a go.
>
> Oxford's Advanced: "Idealism ...system of thought in which ideas
> are believed to be the only real things of which we can know
> anything." The opposite is realism or materialism and this is another
> facet of the subject/object aggregate. Do we agree on that?
>
> > I think the relationship between the MOQ and idealism is summed up in
> > the statement Dan quoted from Lila's Child
>
> > "The MOQ says that Quality comes first, which produces ideas, which
> > produce what we know as matter. The scientific community that has
> > produced Complementarity almost invariably presumes that matter comes
> > first and produces ideas. However, as if to further the confusion, the
> > MOQ says that the idea that matter comes first is a high quality
> > idea!" [Lila's Child p.202]
>
> In ZMM Phaedrus rejects BOTH idealism and materialism. The
> method by which he tackles materialism is by showing that everything
> is idealist (from the idealist/materialist premises that is). Then he
> rejects idealism by showing that the idealist/materialist divide
> collapses faced with QUALITY.
>
> Thus the subjective side (ideas) is as invalid as the objective one and
> this is why I am so disappointed by the said annotation. What has
> "ideas" to do in a reality he has rid of the SOM? Why re-introduce the
> very same idealism he had rejected in ZMM? Quality produces the
> idea/non-idea aggregate ....as said in ZMM ..and that is a most
> elegant solution.
>
> The postulate of Quality coming first I fully accept, but within this
> context the first static "product" is inorganic value ...and so on
> upwards until - as ZMM argues - Quality creates the S/O aggregate
> (subject and objects it says there) which - seen in the light of the
> MOQ - becomes its intellectual level.
>
> Finally - inside the intellectual reality (SOM) - Phaedrus conceives of
> the Quality Idea ("idea" because intellect only recognises the
> idea/non-idea dichotomy) but it grew too big for intellect and brought
> P. outside the intellectual myth - into insanity.
>
> This is the kernel of our difference so please stick to it.
>
> Sincerely Bo
>
>
> 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 : Thu Oct 09 2003 - 16:43:57 BST