Jaap Karssenberg wrote:
> >The idea that
> >existence precedes essence fits in very well with Pirsig's metaphysics, I
> >believe. Existence, Quality-- the same?
>
> Can you explain this in some more words ? - I'm not very familiar whith
> Satre.
> If Existence=Quality how do you see Dynamic Existence and Static Existence ?
>
Oh that's just perfect! Static Quality = Being-in-itself. Dynamic Quality =
Being-for-itself. I really think that there is some kind of analog here that is
worth exploring. "Being-in-itself is never either possible or impossible. It
is. This is what consciousness expresses in anthropomorphic terms by saying
that being is *de trop*-- that is , that consciousness absolutely cannot derive
being from *anything*, either from another being, or from a possibility, or from
a necessary law. Uncreated, without reason for being, without any connection
with another being, being-in-itself is *de trop* for eternity." (Jean Paul
Sartre in *Being and Nothingness*." *De trop* is impossible to translate into
English (that's interesting!) and implies both superfluity and totality.
Being-for-itself "is like a tiny nihilation which has its origin at the heart of
Being; and this nihilation is sufficient to cause a total upheaval to *happen*
to the In-itself. This upheaval is the world." *Being and Nothingness*. Close
analogy here. But Sartre divides his universe slightly differently than
Pirsig. Pirsig quarreled with the Greeks over which came first, form or
substance? But the Greeks and everyone else (in the West) always saw essence
and "preceding" existence. The "essence" of a thing might be its form (Plato)
or its substance (Socrates) but the essential was always "underlying" the
here-and-now reality. Sartre turns that idea upside down. Here insists that
Nothingness exists, without any essence at all. He divides Existence into two
halves -- Being and Nothingness. He further divides Being into Being-in-itself
(Static?) and Being-for-itself (Dynamic?). So, if my analogy is correct at all,
Pirsig's Quality is one half (Being) of Sartre's world. The other half--
nothingness, must be a part of Quality if Quality is everything-- but what do we
call THAT? It's a very interesting question, and I don't have an immediate
answer.
Regards,
Dan
------- End of forwarded message -------
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:30 BST