Dear Glenn and other Mfer's,
This is a quick one and unfortunately I can only refer to some points in
Your post dated 13th of feb..
You make some good points there and especially Your argumentation
considering the platypus made me think.
I studied biology and one must see that zoology is the oldest and most
fundamental part of it.
When the monotremata where discovered there was a big tohuwabohu under
zoologists. Pirsig is stating it by saying that zoologists thought somebody
has knitted two parts of different anmals together.
The systemization of flora and fauna was the first scientific tool people
like Alexander von Humboldt and Lamarge used to describe a significant part
of our world. These great men put every beeing they found into a relative
context. The name for that context is zoology.
With great acuratesse they collected animals and plants, put these in
'boxes' and made pyramids out of these 'boxes'. The structure of these
pyramids is based on ideas. And the distinction between mammals and reptiles
is a very important idea located way down in one of the most important
branches of the tree that puts the complete fauna in a system.
The worth of this system was the acurate placing in a sorting system which
was constructed out of ideas.
When the first platypii came the whole model was put in question. Meaning,
'You have the wrong ideas'. Questioning all the ideas. So the whole system
was endangered. The ideas were probably useless and all which was left was
data. Data which would be different if the ideas, setting up the collecting
and relating tool zoology, would be different. Meaning throw everything
written so far in the dumpbin.
It was like hundreds of enthusiastic, talented and risk taking people set up
a cardhouse and then something came along and 'said': " Nice try guys. But
now think it all over again because I am alive and You said I COULD NOT
EXIST ". So much work, so much hope and then.... .
They did not restructure the whole system. (As in my opinion people like Mr.
Pirsig would have tried. Remember him writing about the cardboard boxes and
his hesitating). They encapsuled the platypus and the antaeter in a world of
its own.
Go and ask zoologists what they think about this 'way out'. They still feel
uneasy. But today zoology is of no importance to the bleeding edge of
scientific development in biology. Nobody recognizes this 'way out' anymore.
But I still see Your point. Let me ask a question. What would have happened
if the zoologists had developed their system in the frame of the MOQ ?
One more point and this might come out of an autosuggestion. But if you
believe that everything is value it is easier to show respect. Respect by
recognizing/feeling the outline of people and things surrounding you and
taking part in Your everyday live. An outline which easily vanishes when You
forget the very special consistency - feel - smell - taste - sound - of your
surrounding in this everyday interaction.
With a proper understanding of the MOQ You would not need a holiday. But
actually I do not know if I understand the MOQ properly.
A quick one about the pounding on " For how many people is the SOM view /
the mind/matter split relevant ? "
Even if there is no overall problematic undercurrent, the feeling that
something is wrong, resulting from a direct emotional response to the way we
all were teached approaching things/people. Even if in a conscious way this
is only relevant to these famous 2 %.
The busdriver might say: I don't mind. But he is living in a world made out
of ideas, picked up by these 2 %. So he does not see a relation but he is
affected anyway. The world we live in makes us think the way we think.
I must go now and hopefully,You dear reader, will find something in my post.
Thanx, Andreas
By the way.. A great topic thanks to phil.
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:18 BST