dmb said:
...the attempt to place the MOQ in some realm beyond intellect is just
really, really dumb. I think a person would have to ignore or
misunderstand pragmatism, radical empiricism, philosophical mysticism
and dozens of direct statements from Pirsig in order to entertain such a
notion. ...Its just impossible nonsense.
Ron replied:
...No doubt it is by Radical empiricism and Pragmatism that MoQ must
operate within the cultural context. To gain acceptance it must prove
useful. Otherwise it remains a mystical allusion, wouldn't you say?
dmb says:
Firstly, I'd say that it is impossible to avoid operating with the
cultural context. We simply have no choice about that. Pragmatism and
radical empiricism is mainstream American philosophy so that, yes, it is
an excellent way to make the MOQ "acceptable". This alignment with James
and Dewey is also what makes the mysticism work in an "acceptable" way.
There is nothing supernatural or faith-based about this philosophical
mysticism. It is based on direct everyday experience. But I fail to see
how any of this is related to my complaint about the MOQ existing on
some "meta-level". The idea that we have to invent a whole new level of
reality in order to make a place for Pirsig's ideas is nonsense. There
are good ideas, bad ideas, old ideas and new ideas. Why should this be a
problem?
Ron:
It's not really about the MoQ as a concept so much as the state of
awareness
It evokes. To lump it in with static intellectual patterns doesn't seem
to work. It doesn't leave any room to experience quality.
Dmb:
Bodvar rejects the idea that anybody except Pirsig has ever rejected SOM
but I know that this simply isn't true. James and Dewey are the most
relevant examples. The mystics have been saying so for a couple dozen
centuries. Bo also rejects mysticism as new age junk, but I know that
this is not true either. (Although there certainly is such a thing as
new age junk.)
Ron:
Interestingly enough, that's where MoQ drops us off, in the mystic.
Dmb:
Bo thinks the MOQ is not an intellectual description of reality but
rather reality itself, but this is explicitly denied by Pirsig many
times. This is what I mean when I say he's lightyears away from the MOQ.
He rejects DQ as the mystical reality, he rejects the idea that
alternatives to SOM can exists without the MOQ, he rejects the
definition of the intellectual level and the idea that there are only
four levels of static quality. I ask you in all seriousness, what the
heck is left after all that rejection? Nothing except the MOB (the
metaphysics of Bodvar). No part of it makes any sense to me.
Ron:
Well, you do have some legitimate gripes there.
Thanks.
_________________________________________________________________
Make distant family not so distant with Windows Vista(r) + Windows
Live(tm).
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/digitallife/keepintouch.mspx?ocid=TXT_T
AGLM_CPC_VideoChat_distantfamily_012008
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/
