Re: MD What is the role of SO divide in MOQ?

From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Fri Feb 13 2004 - 22:41:44 GMT

  • Next message: Steve Peterson: "Re: MD Attention all forum posters"

    Paul:
    > This would make the MOQ the same as idealism. I think that's a bad move.
    > I think it's best to keep subjects and objects as evolutionary levels
    > within static quality.

    Hi Paul

    I do not think so, maybe you take me wrong.
    Pirsig says experience is cut into subject/object to get SOM
    and he proposes a DQ/SQ cut instead. Now experience is
    no different in either scheme (holistically) only its analysis, nor is
    anything left out.
    So if SQ/DQ is a different cut then some of what is subject in
    SOM must be either SQ or DQ in MOQ, and what is object
    in SOM is either SQ or DQ in MOQ, I am suggesting that a lot
    of what is subject in SOM ends up in SQ in MOQ, hence
    leaving a little of what is in the subject in SOM necessarily
    falling into DQ in the MOQ. In this sense a 'reduced subject' falls into DQ
    in MOQ.
    The reduction is very deep, of course, leaving something transcendental and
    divine perhaps.
    From my extensive reading of German
    idealism I have no doubt that what we talk about as pure DQ in MOQ
    is attributed to the subject in idealism (with its divine inflation in fact)
    . Do you follow this logic?
    The only objection to it could be that DQ refers to something about
    experience
    that is outside of SOM, but that would be too misunderstand binary thinking
    I believe
    and claim something Pirsig does not.

    regards
    David M

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Paul Turner" <paulj.turner@ntlworld.com>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 8:15 PM
    Subject: RE: MD What is the role of SO divide in MOQ?

    > David, Poot
    >
    > David said:
    > In fact the DQ is like a reduced 'subject', i.e. having any
    > static/patterned elements removed.
    >
    > Paul:
    > This would make the MOQ the same as idealism. I think that's a bad move.
    > I think it's best to keep subjects and objects as evolutionary levels
    > within static quality.
    >
    > 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
    >

    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 - 23:52:42 GMT