Bo asked: I guess James' "aesthetic continuum" is another name for this pre-intellectual awareness that's neither subjective nor objective. But what does the dividing?
DM: I see. I would say that there are many qualities that we experience. There is no need or way to explain this experience. The way SOM tries to explain this plurality of qualities is what MOQ rejects for the reasons Pirsig states. I think you are trying to find an explanation for the plurality of qualities and think we need to recognise it in terms of an s-o divide as if that actually explains something and I'd suggest it does not. MOQ does not ignore the plurality of qualities and levels of SQ, but neither does it need to see them in terms of an S-O divide. But I can see why you might feel a need to have this distinction to explain for the continuum becomes divided, but this re-introduces the idea of a subject and all the problems of some entity that seem to be in touch with objects and all the problems of that dualism. MOQ suggests an unfolding process of reality-experience where there is no non-experiencing aspects being divided by special non-physical aspects that do the dividing. Without SOM there is no distinction between physical change and awareness of change. 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/
