Re: MD The Dynamic/Static resolution.

Date: Wed Feb 18 2004 - 22:23:58 GMT

  • Next message: steve: "Re: MD An atheistic system?"


    I'll simply comment on this:

    Bo said:
    David M. claims that he and Heidegger has gone past the SOM, but I maintain that there was no SOM until the MOQ. Nobody can go beyond anything before it is outlined. To transcend the S/O has been a religious mystical pastime till now - not a philosophical one.

    The mistake I see you and others make is that, because nobody before Pirsig used the locution "Subject-Object Metaphysics," nobody else could possibly be doing what Pirsig is doing. This is facile. I absolutely, 100% agree that Pirsig created SOM, just as all the other great philosophers created their enemies. What David and I and many others are claiming is that Pirsig can be seen in the same leit motif as Nietzsche, James, Heidegger, Wittgenstein, and Dewey (to name just a few), that each respective philosopher's enemy very much resembles the other enemies. What syncretists like myself suggest is that you can learn a lot by putting these philosophers and their enemies side by side with one another.

    When David claims that Heidegger transcended the Subject-Object Metaphysics, he is saying that Heidegger's enemy (at turns, "the onto-theological tradition," "Platonism," "metaphysics," etc.) is very much the same as Pirsig's. For instance, Heidegger's claim that early Greek thinking was not yet metaphysical matches up very well with Pirsig's narrative, which has Plato making the inversion of Truth over Good. Were both thinkers talking about the exact same thing? No, there are certainly divergences. But I think you and others are a bit strong in stressing Pirsig's idiosyncracy sometimes.


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 18 2004 - 22:25:48 GMT