From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Mon Jul 19 2004 - 14:05:13 BST
Hi Mark
From the Copleston annotations on Anthony McWatt's website:
The MOQ takes takes the Oriental line, that it [completely harmonious and
all-inclusive experience] is a falling away of static patterns achievable by
meditation or other disciplines. The Buddha also does not tell us precisely
in what this transformation consists. He simply says “See for yourself.”
(Robert Pirsig)
That's what I mean when I say experience comes first. Imagining, standing,
holding, applying, pointing, all that, considered in the MOQ as static
patterns of value, comes later. That's what the Buddha meant. That is what
the master is attempting to impart to his student, as I see it now.
Mark 19-7-04: I agree. This very thread is called, 'the metaphysics of
freedom' and not, 'see for yourself.' So don't start moving the goal posts half way
through the game Dan. Either we are discussing freedom in a conceptualised
sense or we are seeing for ourselves.
Ironically, coherence is situational so you do in fact experientially verify
it empirically by 'seeing for yourself.'
>There may be many of them, and in varying degrees. But the best ones, as
>far
>as the MOQ understands, involve the most recently evolved patterns: Humans.
>How more free can a Human be?
Where did this come from? The only human I know who's free is the homeless
fellow who sleeps under the stairs at the nieghborhood laundrymat. Freedom
carries a heavy price.
Mark 19-7-04: The enlightened understand it's all conceptualised and can deal
with it.
>EH insulted the master by relying on habit. In, 'A river runs through it'
>the
>narrator says a fly fisher must be worthy to catch a fish. If a fly fisher
>fishes by habit, he/she is not paying respect to the art. It does not
>matter
>what the art is - all art is about DQ.
So we could say student Herrigal was cheating and insulted the master.
Mark 19-7-04: We are saying it.
But
he certainly meant no insult and he didn't intend to cheat.
Mark 19-7-04: He was learning and did not understand. The master accepted
this and renewed his engagement.
In fact,
remember Herrigal anticipated how the master would be most pleased with his
progress. Rather it seems there is a fundamental difference in how we of the
West learn a skill compared to Eastern traditions.
I happened to read that Bobby Fischer was arrested in Japan just a few days
ago. He reminds me of the story of William James Sidis who RMP mentions in
LILA. Normally we in the West think someone successful who reaches the
pinacle of their chosen profession but that term hardly applies in Fischer's
case. He comes across as mentally unbalanced at best. Yet there is little
doubt that if he had chosen to keep playing chess he could have beaten
anyone in the world.
Is it worth our while to ask ourself just how did the master learn the skill
that he is now attempting to impart to student Herrigal? He didn't learn by
practicing, otherwise he WOULD have been pleased with student Herrigal's
progress. How about Bobby Fischer? How did he learn to play so well that he
could beat anyone? There's no school that teaches that.
Mark 19-7-04: Robert Fripp, in his introduction to 'the guitar handbook' by
Ralph Denyer suggests that a student teaches himself with the aid of the
master. That makes sense to me because the student is a unique set of sq reaching
for coherence under the motivation of DQ. Perhaps EH's master was aided to a
great extent by his culture? Japanese culture not only uses art to explore DQ but
it explores new art forms to explore DQ! If you think about it, all masters
are teaching the same thing in different ways. We in the west may call this,
'Transferable skills' but that is a bit of a damp squib by comparison?
Bobby Fischer? Since Aristotle's ethics it has been commented that some kids
are skilled mathematicians. It's pure intellectual Quality without social
mediation; this may be why it seems so cold and inhuman? Chess is like that i
feel. But the quality kick a chess player gets from seeing the best move is where
it's all at. In a way, that kind of makes it Human, because although you and i
may not be great chess players, you and i may have experience coherence
elsewhere in our lives - at different levels - so all we have to say to the chess
player is, 'Hey, you hit a real sweet spot with that last move' and everyone
immediately understands, together, as Humans.
more follows....
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 Jul 19 2004 - 14:08:34 BST