Bodvar Skutvik (skutvik@online.no)
Wed, 22 Oct 1997 04:15:16 +0100
Maggie wrote:
> Disadvantages (from my point of view): Netscape doesn't run on Amiga
> computers. (I think only PC and Macintosh) That's why I bought a PC, so
> we could be "compatible". After a eight-month delay with all kinds of
> glitches, we are, I guess.
Just for your info. Maggie, I have a son who is an avid Amiga fan, it
is very devotional thing (he is the son of his father obviously!).
What this system/machine can do that the PC or Mac can't is unclear
to me, but it is a mystic society not open to discussion or outsiders
I understand.:-)
This is just an arrow in the blue. You have at several occasions
referred to books. It happens that people say to me: Look to that
writer, thinker, book etc., it is exactly the same as what Pirsig
says!. One such writer/book that I was tipped about was Ken Wilber's
"Up From Eden". Do you - or anyone else - know that one?
I admit there are similarities, strong ones, uncannily strong at
times. If you know this writer it is unnecessary to sum up his
theory, but I may do it for the benefit of the others. It's been some
time since I read it, but very general: His is "The Great Chain of
Being"; a circle that starts with Nature and end up in a mystical
unity of everything. Between these two poles are several stages:
Body, Membership, Ego-Mind, Psychic, Subtle and Causal.
This bears some resemblance to the Static levels of Pirsig,
Nature=Inorganic; Body=Organic, Membership=Social, Ego-
Mind=Intellect (the rest may be Doug's "beyond intellect" ones? :-)).
What struck me was his reference to Julian Jaynes and the fact
that Wilber uses the "consciousness" term in much the same way that
(I interpret) the MOQ and not in the SOM awareness-of-objective
reality sense, or - uh - "perception of Dynamic Quality" as some
of the LSers do. He speaks of one consciousness belonging to each
segment of his circle.
Still, as I see it, there is a very fundamental difference between
Wilber and Pirsig, namely that the former regards evolution or
history as an increasing "spiritualising" of matter, while the latter
postulates matter as another Static Quality Level. Yes, even
postulates "Mind" (Intellect) as another Static Quality Level!!!!!!!!
Spirit does not enter the picture at all! This is very significant
and places Wilber in the traditional SOM camp while - again - Pirsig
is something unheard of.
Typically enough, Wilber was embraced and praised copiously while
Pirsig is rejected almost automatically. In other words the MOQ is
identified by the cultural immune system as not-self and attacked
viciously. Most people - like my correspondent - may have trouble
seeing the difference between Wilber and Pirsig, but the guardians of
our cultural shrines (Galen Strawson and Dan Cryer) sense danger when
Pirsig's work is brought up.
We, the LS, perhaps recognize Pirsig for just the opposite reason:
We want to see the SOM Ark toppled.
Comments anyone, if you know Ken Wilber or not.
Thanks for reading.
Bodvar
-- post message - mailto:skwok@spark.net.hk unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:06 CEST