Ron,
Do you think Ham has a different philosophy?
Different from what is called the moq?
SA
SA,
I feel Ham has come to a very similar point but by a differing path,I
also feel that while
he focuses on the individuals relationship with source Pirsig focuses on
empirical explaination
and practicle employment in regard to scientific inquirey. I think we
have the age old
classic/romantic split of a single concept, I'd like to work it out and
see if this is the case.
who knows, it could lead to something bigger than both. Throw in Bo's
SOL and one would have
a metaphysical swiss army knife with MOQ as it's hub.
-Ron
--- Ron Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marsha,
> that's cool, I think Ham has some good points, I feel the difficulty
> in understanding each other makes communication stressful. If I can
> smooth things out and focus on stuck points and discern the truer
> aspects of the conflict of ideas perhaps we can resolve them or
> perhaps not but at the very least we can pinpoint what they are with
> more clarity.
> -Ron
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MarshaV
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 10:11 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [MD] "100% confident"
>
>
> Hi Ron,
>
> Sorry I haven't responded earlier, but I was not at all understanding
> your post. I'll try for a better understanding as thread continues
> without me.
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
> At 08:37 AM 10/10/2007, you wrote:
> >[Ron]
> > >
> > > Ham, I believe, is not interpolating into the
> objective/static as
> > > much
> >
> > > when he contends that subjective value sense is
> the only thing by
> > > which we can know anything. The fact being that
> individual minds
> > > perceiving a universal continuity establishes an
> absolute source of
> > > perceptual reality while still maintaining
> individual perception of
> > > this shared phenomena.
> >[Ham]
> >Why are you addressing me in the third person, Ron?
> >
> >[Ron]
> >I'm trying to bridge the gap in understanding
> between your concepts and
>
> >Pirsigs.
> >I was aiming mostly at Marsha in explaination but
> also wanted you to
> >comment on my understanding of Essentialsim. How am
> I doing so far?
> >[Ham]
> >Your use of "static" here confuses me, since I
> don't regard
> >subject/object relations as static, and I don't
> comprehend the meaning
> >of "interpolating into" them. I've never said that
> "subjective value
> >is the only thing by which we can know anything."
> However, I do
> >believe that value sensibility is the core self,
> and that all
> >experience is derived from it. But your last
> sentence has me totally
> >baffled. You seem to be asserting that "individual
> minds...establish
> >an absolute source," if I analyze it correctly. I
> trust that you mean
> >establishes the CONCEPT of an absolute source.
> Individual perception
> >doesn't create the source; it creates the
> experience of phenomena.
> >
> >[Ron]
> >That's what I meant, I was getting alittle carried
> away by concepts and
>
> >not focusing on clear description in writing.I term
> static in the MOQ
> >sense of the word as encompassing subject/object
> relations as to
> >provide a frame of understanding for MOQer's.
> >
> > > Ham sees the ultimate value, the value of the
> individual with this
> > > source of perceived reality. This relationship
> is what is important
> > > not so much the positing of a universal concept
> of how objective/
> > > static reality works empirically.
> >[Ham]
> >"Ultimate value" is the relation of the negate
> (individual self) to the
>
> >source (Essence). This value is not directly
> experienced but only
> >sensed, pre-intellectually. The physiological
> organism breaks value
> >down into differentiated sensations from which the
> intellect constructs
>
> >empirical reality (things and events that appear in
> space/time).
> >[Ron]
> >Thank you for cleaning up my meaning.
> >
> > > Ham is more of a humanist where Pirsig is more
> of an empiricist.
> >[Ham]
> >That's your characterization, Ron. I'm not sure
> what a humanist is.
> >(I hope it doesn't imply humanitarian!) Webster's
> Collegiate defines
> >Humanism as "devotion to the humanities:
> >literary culture." I would think that is more
> idiosyncratic of a
> >novelist and man of letters like Pirsig than a
> non-academic like
> myself.
> >As an anthropocentrist, I believe that the human
> individual is the free
>
> >agent of the universe. So perhaps "individualist"
> would be a more
> >appropriate term.
> >
> >[Ron]
> >Perhaps it would, I was trying to convey that you
> seem (to me) to focus
>
> >on relationships in regard to the individual rather
> than an empirical
> >understanding as a whole. Your view IMO takes a
> more personal approach.
> >[Ham]
> >Thanks, Ron. And kindly explain what you meant by
> the statement
> >"...individual minds perceiving a universal
> continuity establishes an
> >absolute source of perceptual reality."
> >[Ron]
> >Well I meant that the evidence for source lies in
> the continuity of
> >percieved objects. That object may mean and appear
> differently to
> >different individuals but the basic objective
> descriptive reference is
> >the same.
> >ie. a blue ball. 20 out of 20 individuals will all
> recognize the object
>
> >as being blue, round, and perhaps a ball. these 20
> people may differ on
>
> >hue and shade of the ball or size or whether or not
> they like the color
>
> >blue or the shape or meaning ect. But you are
> certainly correct in
> >pointing out that source is a concept.
> >
> >I'm trying to bring both concepts together,
> Essentialsim and MOQ in an
> >effort to enrich understanding of both and perhaps
> break new ground.
> >
> >Essentially yours,
> >Ron
> >
> >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/
>
> 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/
>
=== message truncated ===
________________________________________________________________________
____________
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
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/
