MD The Dynamic/Static resolution.

From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Fri Feb 13 2004 - 08:54:02 GMT

  • Next message: Paul Turner: "RE: MD Objectivity, Truth and the MOQ"

    Paul and Discussers.

    On 9 Feb. as we were discussing whether Rhetorics were a social
    level endeavour you cited Pirsig:

    > "The identification of rta and aretÍ was enormously valuable,
    > Phaedrus thought, because it provided a huge historical panorama in
    > which the fundamental conflict between static and Dynamic Quality
    > had been worked out....The resolution of this conflict in the
    > Buddhist and Vedantist philosophies is one of the profound
    > achievements of the human mind." [Lila p.347]

    > Pirsig isn't saying that a "Quality era" to follow your
    > "intellectual era" dawned in the seventies, he is suggesting that
    > thousands of years ago, what he calls Quality, the Sophists called
    > arÍte, the Hindus called rta, the Taoists called Tao, the Buddha
    > called nothingness....

    This I found having little to do with out debate, all in all Im' not
    sure how it relates to the MOQ at all where the static levels are
    supposed to cover everything. Here Pirsig speaks of the
    dynamic/static relationship in general ..and yet about a historical
    epoch and its people. What levels are these things played out at?

    I think it belongs to some very early stage in his way towards the
    MOQ before the static system was worked out. Pirsig says in the
    beginning of the passage (p.386 ) "Long ago when he first
    explored the idea of Quality he had reasoned ...etc." But what I
    have come to believe is that Pirsig here reveals a Oriental variety
    of the story he tells in ZMM

    Look, Phaedrus identified his Quality with the AretÍ he saw
    displayed by the ancient Greeks. At that time he hadn't made the
    DQ/SQ slash, but looking back, this Greek Mythos era must have
    been like the one described in the Rta passage: One of gods
    upholding the MORAL order of the universe. That's why he later -
    in LILA - includes the Rta in the Quality=AretÍ equation.

    Do you see what I mean? The RT passage is Pirsig pointing to a
    similar Indian-Hindu mythological past of gods etc. Now, in ZMM
    it was Phaedrus' frustration over SOM that triggered his Quality
    insight, thus the big question is: Was there - are there - an Hindu
    "SOM" that could have caused Oriental Phaedrus to create a
    Metaphysics of Rta?. In his letter Pirsig speaks of an Oriental
    intellectual level arrived at at the Upanisadic times (1500-500
    BC) which is definitely later than the said Myth era.

    A last stab at our debate. Seen from the MOQ everything must fit
    the level system and as I see it the Social era fits this Rta-AretÍ-
    Quality scheme perfectly. On page 386 (Bodley Head) LILA says:

    "The mythos is the social culture and THE RHETORIC which the
    culture must invent before philosophy becomes possible." (my
    capitals)

    and a little further down the page:

    "The Mythos over Logos thesis agrees with the MOQ's assertion
    that intellectual patterns are built up out of social patterns."

    And as Intellect follows Society "philosophy" means Intellect
    here. I have driven you from one stand to the next, but the more
    battles I win the more adherers you seem to gain. That's OK, now
    that you have Matthew (the Fallen Priest) with you I am sure to
    be on the right side. ;-)

    IMO
    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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 13 2004 - 08:55:20 GMT