Hi Ron/DMB

And when we come to describe and divide this reality
there are many ways to do so. Subject/object is one
way and has some uses, its latches onto certain
qualities of our experience, there are many others
to be dscribed. There are qualities that are more
pertinent than those described by the subject-object
division. MOQ notices that all our experiences are
based in values. What we experience/notice we experience as
having a value from the horrific through to bliss. And
MOQ notices that the flux and change dominate our
experience, yet there are also some patterns and order
to notice and desribe. It is a long way down the road
of conceptual evolution that we might suggest such
generalities as subjects and objects. People and stuff
must get noticed a long time before such conceptual
peculiarities as subjects and objects. And when you
look hard, SOM causes many conceptual problems
but has been very useful for dominance over nature
and is now costing us dearly. If you can't grasp this
via Pirsig, try James, or Dewey, or even Heidegger.

Regards
David M



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "david buchanan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] subject / object logic


> 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.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Messenger Café - open for fun 24/7. Hot games, cool activities served 
> daily.
> Visit now. http://cafemessenger.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_AugHMtagline
>
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


> 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/ 


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