From: Paul Turner (paulj.turner@ntlworld.com)
Date: Tue Jun 15 2004 - 10:37:41 BST
Hi Johnny
Johnny said:
...the values of the pre-intellectual awareness are not sensed or valued
randomly, but rather are sensed and valued for reasons. This is the
connection of Reason, as in, the ability of consciousness to order and
structure according to values
Paul:
You seem to be equating Rand's Reason with Pirsig's Quality.
"The overwhelming majority of facts, the sights and sounds that are
around us every second and the relationships among them and everything
in our memory...these have no Quality, in fact have a negative quality.
If they were all present at once our consciousness would be so jammed
with meaningless data we couldn't think or act. So we pre-select on the
basis of Quality, or, to put it Phædrus' way, the track of Quality
pre-selects what data we're going to be conscious of, and it makes this
selection in such a way as to best harmonize what we are with what we
are becoming." [ZMM p.319]
In the MOQ, reason is not required to 'pre-select' a structured reality,
reason is secondary to value, it follows value. If you equate reason
with value then I think you are moving away from Pirsig towards Plato.
Johnny said:
Reason, as in, the idea that there is only one way for consciousness to
order and structure reality, and it is dependent on the prior order and
structure of reality.
Paul:
Just because our experience isn't a random integration of sense-data, it
does not follow that "there is only one way for consciousness to order
and structure reality." This is similar to the stance taken by
'objective idealists' who, whilst denying the independent existence of a
world of objects, nevertheless maintain the existence of
'things-as-they-are,' which in your case may be
'things-as-they-have-to-be' or 'things-as-they-are-expected.'
Johnny said:
Unless someone is proposing that each moment bears no connection to the
previous or next moments, I don't see how Rand and the MoQ are
incompatible.
Paul:
I'm certainly not proposing that but I don't see what it has to do with
deciding the compatibility of Pirsig and Rand.
Johnny said:
Rand just stresses reason, whereas Pirsig stresses value.
Paul:
Rand begins with an absolute objective reality which can be known and
understood by reason.
Pirsig begins with a fundamental reality that cannot be known or
understood by reason.
I think the difference is a little more than 'emphasis.'
Johnny said:
But you can't have either without the other. Both are aspects of
Morality.
Paul:
I think the MOQ argues that there is no reason without value but there
is value without reason. I agree that they are both aspects of Morality
- static and Dynamic aspects.
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 : Tue Jun 15 2004 - 10:35:49 BST