RE: MF Discussion Topic for January 2004

From: Jay Casler (
Date: Fri Jan 09 2004 - 02:36:08 GMT

  • Next message: David Buchanan: "RE: MF Discussion Topic for January 2004"

    Greetings group,

    I'm new at discussions on Persig, but I've re-read Zen at least five
    times and Lila twice. I hope that makes me qualified to comment.

    My interpretation of this discussion on the senses and quality is that
    when Persig illustrates a similarity between the five senses and the
    ability to discern quality, his intent was to establish that quality
    exists before, with and after all of our senses. For instance, your
    eyes turn from the sun, your ears shriek at a loud sound, and your hand
    moves from the stove when it feels heat, your nose doesn't like a skunk,
    and your mouth will spit out bitter food. In contrast, a flower is easy
    to look at, soft green grass feels good to your feet, Beethoven's music
    makes your ears smile, Apple Pie makes your nose open just before you
    gobble a large bite of it.

    Any description I can fathom of our use of the five senses seems to me
    to be an immediate quality response. The senses seem to be a sort of
    "quality radar" for all things that we don't "think" about.

    So, I'm not sure that he does or does not adequately support his notion,
    but to me the notion was accurate without being stated. By their nature
    the senses are quality yes/no determiners.

    In short, I agree with the last line of Wim's email.

    It's merely an
    analytical tool for describing how these five senses are working:
    them we only experience what has value.

    Jay Casler

    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archive -
    MF Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jan 11 2004 - 05:53:50 GMT