From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Tue Dec 30 2003 - 18:41:25 GMT
Hi Bo
Connections to Nietzsche are pretty
strong I think, Nietzsche does a lot
to question metaphysical assumptions,
and his Will To Power is very much to
do with increasing complexity and new levels
superceding what has gone before. I have read
a review that says ZMM is close to Nietzsche's
Zarathustra. I am sure what Niezsche has to say
would be interesting to a Pirsig fan.
Bo:You mean what role the MOQ is supposed to play? Pirsig makes it
> sound as if it's a philosophical adjustment, but it is really ...well
> ...revolution
DM:What sort of revolution would you say? & do you see
Pirsig as making this revolution possible or as just playing a role in
it?
Bo:Even so quantum theory delivers correct answers so there is no
> irregularity if that is what you mean by freedom, while there IS a
> certain ambiguity (Pirsig calls it) with the more complex elements,
> for instance carbon's chemical valences.
DM: Well the predictions are statistical and do not apply to single
particles, in the same way we describe human behaviour by statistics
if we want to examine it. With snooker balls and mechanics we can
have determinism, no where else. Also you are right about complex
entities like cities. The whole point of achieving the deterministic level
of molecular combinations is to be able to build things, the purpose
at work in the cosmos is really rather hard to ignore, it is amazing how far
science has gone on denying it.
Bo:once the ''M' is taken over
> by the MOQ the value of the subject/object divide is well worth
> retaining.
DM:Pretty much agree with this, as long as we are clear that
matter,substance,etc is a myth.
Therefore it is useful to talk about static patterns rather than objects
because you can
look at non-quantitative patterns, e.g history for example, where there is
objectivity without
phyicalist-reductive explanations.
I am aware of Wilson but never read him.
Bo:A similar experience as Phaedrus of ZMM ..the one that made him
> drop out of school?
>
Yes, my novel 'The Secret of Matter' tries to do many of the things
Pirsig does, I think he manages to do it in an easier to read format
than me, but I have also attempting a few steps in certain directions
that he does not look at. Anyone here wants a soft copy send me an email.
I think that anyone serious about philosophy and Pirsig should
take a look at Heidegger because it would be an accepted way
to discuss Pirsig's ideas academically. But it is tough stuff.
regards
David M
----- Original Message -----
From: <skutvik@online.no>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: MD Buddhism and the MOQ (Was Sit on my faith)
> David M. and Humanity
>
> 28 Dec. you wrote:
>
> > Bo:Mankind from the earliest age looked for explanations
> > of origin and destination, and tried to manipulate the force that
> > controlled their fate. This is the origin of "religion" and developed
> > into complex mythologies.
>
> > DM: This is entirely how I see it from Nietzsche of course.
>
> Good. Have we ever discussed a possible Nietzsche-Pirsig
> connection? It would have been interesting, it's ages since I read
> (about) him, but remember that I saw some likeness when ZMM
> was new.
>
> > Are we
> > now on for a religion that embraces transcience and becoming?
>
> You mean what role the MOQ is supposed to play? Pirsig makes it
> sound as if it's a philosophical adjustment, but it is really ...well
> ...revolution.
>
> > Bo: One may say that everything has a dynamic moment before
> > > manifesting at the respective level, that - for instance - every
> > > inorganic pattern has a fleeting moment before it "becomes" a
> > > photon, but this springs from a the fallacy of believing that
> > > "substance" is something different from inorganic value.
>
> > DM:Please explain. I would agree with "One may say that everything
> > has a dynamic moment before ...
>
> > > > manifesting at the respective level, that - for instance - every
> > > > inorganic pattern has a fleeting moment before it "becomes" a
> > > > photon",
>
> > in as far quantum physics has to accept probability
> > fields and give up mechanics it is having to deal with DQ I would
> > suggest. Unless we are limiting DQ to the provision of new SQ.
>
> The reason for my saying so ...and the next that it is based on a
> misunderstanding ... is that I see it as unnecessary to postulate a
> Q event at each static level (I have a vague recollection that Pirsig
> has said something to that effect recently).
>
> Regarding quantum weirdness. The inorganic level has a special
> position because it borders on to the dynamic void at its "lower"
> end .. as intellect does at its "upper" ...consequently its patterns
> recede into a region where they becomes extremely "subtle". If
> this explains the quantum paradoxes I don't know.
>
> > I do not in my assumptions.
> > DQ is associated with freedom in my mind. The inorganic levels of
> > photons/particles/atoms/molecules contain different levels of freedom
moving
> > from more freedom to less freedom (in the form of mass and
combinability).
>
> Even so quantum theory delivers correct answers so there is no
> irregularity if that is what you mean by freedom, while there IS a
> certain ambiguity (Pirsig calls it) with the more complex elements,
> for instance carbon's chemical valences.
>
> > Hence I see the inorganic levels as moving from almost pure DQ/freedom
to
> > more SQ/constriction and less DQ/freedom.
>
> Hmm, well as said it may not be so and out of the inorganic level
> the rule seems to be from from stability towards instability. The
> simplest organisms are most resilient while the more complex are
> more vulnerable, yet the human (mammal) organism was needed
> for the social development. Likewise, when the social level was
> established its basic patterns are the most stable ones, while the
> immensely complex structure called a "state" is easily toppled,
> yet necessary for the intellectual development (the Greek City
> state IMO). If this matches your "freedom" scheme ???
>
> > As for
> > substance/physicalism/matter these to me are myths.
>
> THAT we agree about!
>
> > Bo:The value of the subject/object distinction is an enormous one that
> > > raised mankind from the mythological era (social level) and a
> > > prerequisite for science.
>
> > DM: I agree with this in so far as we then go on to say that the MOQ
> > (a new awareness of DQ/Being/Be(com)ing/ i.e everything that has
> > been ignored and reduced in the concept of the subject) is then
> > required to deal with the inadequacies of SOM as pointed out by
> > Heidegger and then later Pirsig. So that the fullness of experience
> > is available to us, all quality, not just quantity and objective
> > reality, and the distinction of SOM is seen as useful but deeply
> > problematic.
>
> Yes, the MOQ is absolutely about dealing with SOM's
> inadequacies - the chief one that of posing as a metaphysics (that
> the S/O divide is the ultimate reality) and once the ''M' is taken over
> by the MOQ the value of the subject/object divide is well worth
> retaining.
>
> Heidegger? Do you know the British writer/thinker Colin Wilson?
> He was once my favourite and much occupied by Husserl,
> Heidegger and Phenomenology.
>
> > My journey to DQ certainly began with my science
> > studies and my doubts about materialism and physicalism.
>
> A similar experience as Phaedrus of ZMM ..the one that made him
> drop out of school?
>
> 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 : Tue Dec 30 2003 - 18:47:32 GMT