Ron Kulp said:
I feel there is an area MOQ is overlooking by concentration on value
alone. 
I feel perhaps Pirsig takes it to a subjective tilt by positing that
value comes before subjects and objects and subjects and objects can be
dropped or seperated from value. (Ron later added) ...Which then, of
course, projects the universe as being a moral universe because now you
are in the realm of the subjective without knowing it...

dmb says:
As I see it, here you're making some kind of mistake in logic and then
projecting that mistake onto Pirsig. I mean, the charge of a "subjective
tilt" defies Pirsig's central point in asserting a "pre-intellectual
awareness". The most important characteristic of this "pure experience",
as James calls it, is that it is prior to the distinction between self
and world, between subject and object. It is also called an undivided
experience because there are as yet no conceptual distinctions.
Northrop's phrase fits for the same reason; the undifferentiated
aesthetic continuum. And because this primary empirical reality lacks
all divisions, we can't rightly call it subjective or objective. It is
an experience which precedes that distinction.

[Ron]
Perhaps I am making a mistake in logic. For anything to be experienced
it must be differentiated correct?
or else it is not sensed at all correct? how can it be qualified as any
sort of experience with out some
sort of differention?

Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to