Re: MF Re: March 2004 - Metaphysics and the mystical reality.

From: Valence (
Date: Tue Mar 30 2004 - 01:52:53 BST

  • Next message: "Re: MF Re: March 2004 - Metaphysics and the mystical reality."

    Hi again DMB, Sam, and all:

    >> Rick chimed in further:
    >> I think you missed the point of Sam's objection right off the bat. As I
    >> read Sam, the issue is not the use of two different terms for mystical
    >> reality, it's about the identification of the mystical reality with two
    >> distinct philosophical concepts, to wit: (1) mysticism = Quality (the one
    >> undivided whole etc) or (2) mysticism = dynamic quality (a subdivision of
    >> Quality which excludes static patterns).
    >> Hmmm. Really? As I understand it, Sam is making a case that the two quotes
    >> reveal a contradiction and I'm saying that the first quote uses Quality
    >> instead of DQ simply because Pirsig had not yet made the DQ/sq split. He
    >> didn't use the term "DQ" in chapter 5 because it had not yet been
    >> introduced. which is why I pointed out that Pirsig doesn't get to the

    >> DQ/sq split until the middle of chapter nine.

    I still don't see how it answers Sam's objection. Let me break it down for
    you with a multiple choice question. According to Robert Pirsig, mysticism
    should be identified with (a.) Quality (the undivided whole) alone, (b.)
    dynamic quality (a subset of Quality which excludes static patterns) alone,
    (c.) both, (d.) neither. --- your choice?


    >> Once Pirsig decides to come up with a replacement for ZAMM's one-word
    >> metaphysic, on the next page we see him also abandon ZAMM's

    >> split when he says, "Since this whole metaphysics had started with an
    >> attempt to explain Indian mysticism Phaedrus finally abandoned this
    >> classic-romantic split as a choice for a primary division of the MOQ. The
    >> division he finally settled on was one he didn't really choose in any
    >> deliberative way." And 6 or 7 pages later, Pirsig finally uses the knife.
    >> "After many months of thinking about it, he was left with a reward of two
    >> terms: Dynamic good and static good, which became the basic division of

    >> emerging MOQ."

    I still think you're not seeing the problem. Even taking the chronology you
    suggest into account (which is clearly correct), the question still remains,
    should mysticism be identified with the undivided (Q) or with one of the
    divisions (dq)?

    take care

    Argument is the worst sort of conversation. - Jonathan Swift

    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archive -
    MF Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Mar 30 2004 - 16:23:29 BST