From: Paul Turner (paulj.turner@ntlworld.com)
Date: Mon Jan 26 2004 - 13:47:20 GMT
Mati
Paul previously:
In the MOQ, mind and consciousness are just one level of patterns
created by value. Do you think the existence of thoughts depends on
faith?
Mati said:
Yes, when those thought patterns are based on the precepts of SOM.
Pirsig notes in regards to the fictitious "man", "Like 'substance' they
can be used as long as it is remembered that they're terms for
collections of patterns and not some independent primary reality of
their own." Lila 178. When we refer to the "Mind" in such a manner which
is easy to do, it leads us down the garden path back to SOM.
Paul:
I don't see why using "mind" necessarily leads us back to SOM. Mind and
matter are just levels of static quality in the MOQ, with neither being
held as fundamental.
Mati said:
MOQ validates the subjective reality without trying to objectify it.
Subjective reality in SOM only seems to be valid when it is objectified,
and when it can't it be objectified it remains a "Mystic" value.
Paul:
OK, I see how you were using "mystic" now - along the lines of unreal,
ethereal etc. I was confused because mystic has a different meaning in
philosophy - the belief that reality is undivided and outside the
capability of intellect to understand.
Mati said:
What might be some of those intellectual patterns which enable SOM?
Paul:
Rhetoric.
Paul previously:
Thus, Pirsig's definition of the intellectual level is such that it
contains patterns that are not based on the value of "objective
knowledge." Bo's definition excludes such patterns.
Mati said:
I will take a stab at this and it won't be pretty. intellectual patterns
are a genuine reflection of who we are. Objective Knowledge by "itself"
does not reflect anything of who we are. Yet there are times we use
Objective Knowledge to contrast to the Subjective reality to create that
reflection. And that reflection becomes the value of intellect.
Paul:
I have a problem with the term "objective knowledge," which is summed up
by the following comment from Pirsig:
"As the diagram in SODV shows, subjective knowledge (social and
intellectual patterns) is different from objects (biological and
inorganic patterns). Their unity occurs only in the Dynamic Quality that
precedes all patterns. Confusion is generated on this matter when it is
forgotten that all scientific knowledge, including knowledge of objects,
is subjective knowledge. This knowledge is confirmed by experience in
such a way as to allow the scientist to generate a supremely high
quality intellectual belief that external objects exist. But that belief
itself is still subjective." [Lila's Child p.313]
If you mean that knowledge of objects (i.e. inorganic and biological
patterns) on its own doesn't reflect anything of who we are then I can
kind of see what you are saying. However, as Pirsig says, it is
experience i.e. Quality which generates all beliefs, not objects.
Mati said:
I would like to apologize for the many writing mistakes; I am
"Dysgraphic" which manifests itself in my writing of which I am unable
to completely proofread for myself. I have my good days and bad days.
Thank you for your patience on my bad days.
Paul:
There is no need. If I don't understand something you have written, it
isn't because of spelling, it's more likely because these discussions
can become very subtle.
Regards
Paul
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 Jan 26 2004 - 13:55:38 GMT