Hi Steve, I've been reading emails on moq_discuss for around a couple of years and replying to some too. Re quotations from ZAMM and Lila, I don't think Pirsig's word is sacrosanct. They were great books both of which I read several times. Last time I read ZAMM was perhaps six years ago and Lila about two. I haven't read Lila's Child. Pirsig was only human and though he, and probably all of us, have our breakthroughs in understanding and moments of illumination, nevertheless we all lapse back into more habitual ways of thought and our vision becomes a little less clear. Of course I still read plenty of Pirsig through quotes given here. Anyway I'm open to the possibility that Pirsig's ideas may be tuned up and refined some. My policy lately is that I'll rely on refining my own ideas through feedback and discussion on this forum. And practise Platt's delayed gratification with regard to Pirsig's novels and savour them again at some later stage.
One thing that never ceases to surprise and frustrate on this forum is how people can, despite careful attention to clarity, apparently disagree when they really agree and vice versa. If nothing else joining in this forum will, I hope, improve my English and make me more patient. Regards -Peter On 21/12/2007, Steven Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Peter, > > > >I can't pretend to understand all the subtleties of Bo's pronouncements. > He > >speaks with surety but often says things that I can't quite get my head > >around, sometimes I think I have understood him and find I disagree, > other > >times I am persuaded by his explanations. > > > >I agree with you and Bo that symbol activity, or signification, is at all > >levels. I quoted Thomas Sebeok to Bo; since I like the quote so much I'll > >give the rest of it too now: > > > >'The world is composed entirely of signs, and therefore, I think of the > >whole world as my oyster; whereas for some people only the human world, > and > >then only a small portion of that, is their oyster.' > > Steve: > I disagree that there is symbol manipulation at all levels. I think it is > intellectual only. > > > Peter: > >Most usage of signs though is not deliberate, or rather below the level > of > >consciousness, whereas I think of symbol manipulation as a more > deliberate > >usage of signs, perhaps using symbols that refer to other symbols, or in > >programming even treating a function or algorithm as an object. > > Steve: > This deliberate use of signs sounds like intellect. > > Peter: > >I just had a look at the wikipedia entry for 'metaphysics' and after > reading > >the first paragraph thought that the meaning of that word could be > condensed > >down to mean 'beyond matter'. Subject Object Metaphysics, our SOM, is a > >philosophical talking point; perhaps something that can only be done by > >intellectuals. > > Steve: > agree > > Peter: > >Logic is the manipulation of subjects and objects. > > Steve: > Pirsig described logic as an intellectual pattern that codifies rules that > help produce other high quality intellectual patterns. > > > Peter: > >Thinking > >is done by making logical inferences. Perhaps SOM could stand with equal > >legitimacy for Subject Object Manipulation and would still amount to the > >same thing as our usual SOM. > > > >Clearly,it's still all quite vague for me! > > > Steve: > I only resubscribed to the list recently and I'm not sure where you are > coming from. It sounds like you are struggling with understanding the MOQ, > but I don't know what the issues are for you. I would be glad to help with > any of your questions. > > It took me along time to understand what Pirsig is saying partly becasue > of what some of the dominant voices on the list are saying about it. I have > a lot of respect for Bo and Platt. I doubt this discussion group would still > exist without them. However, they both have agendas to push modifications of > Pirsig's MOQ, so I would be careful about relying on them to explain what > Pirsig is saying. > > If I were you, I would seek answers to your questions that include direct > quotes of Pirsig. I would check out Pirsig's annotations to Lila's Child > because about every issue that is still discussed here today was discussed > in LC and commented on by RMP himself. > > Let me know if you have any questions and I will do my best to help. > > Regards, > Steve > > > > 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/
