been reading your conversations with interest and can
see how you guys are talking past each other a bit.
dave is bringing some very welcome news, re: academic
openness to pirsig...thanks in large part to his
thorough integration of pirsig's work into the
existing american pragmatic philosophy canon.
...good on ya fella
Bo is making some very interesting points about the
intellectual level and the metaphysical upshot of the
MOQ in general. I agree with Bo that SOM underlies the
intellectual level and that the MOQ (as theory) points
beyond SOM intellect to a new awareness/conception of
reality.
this new reality is not centuries away however, it is
the awareness of the present moment - the power of
NOW, to use tolle's phrase. whether through
meditation, yoga, tai chi etc people in the west ARE
BEING FORCED to become more mindful, more attentive,
more singularly focussed.
{i say 'forced' because we are *accelerating* towards
this evolutionary shift, which could be seen as a
synthesis of eastern integrated awareness with western
authentic individualism.}
now i think that Bo is also mistaken. the
dynamic/static split is a split and all splits are SOM
and of mutually dependent origination. that is, you
can't have dynamic without static. what you can have
is the state of mind *prior* to any split: the state
of quality awareness or 'care' which Pirsig focussed
large parts of ZAMM on. this INTEGRATED awareness is
the evolutionary shift, the shift away and up from
DUALISTIC awareness.
this obviously highlights the import of dwai's
contributions. some sort of mind-body practice, daily
practice, is necessary to anchor oneself in the 'now'.
to establish and maintain this integration. Dwai's
point is central. there is no intellectual path to
being in the NOW.... you can't get there by theory.
but MOQ *is* a theory. the MOQ is an update for
intellect; it transforms intellect so that it conforms
to and complements and CEMENTS what we know from our
growing integrated awareness - whereas SOM just fails
and throws its hands up and says "what's all that
about??!?".
the era of adversarial dichotomies is coming to a
close.....the era of synergistic syntheses is upon us.
--- david buchanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ron, Bo and all MOBers:
>
> John J. Stuhr, the editor of "Pragmatism and
> Classical American Philosophy" says, In beginning
> to understand his view, it cannot be overemphasized
> that Dewey is not using the word experience in its
> conventional sense. For Dewey, experience is not to
> be understood in terms of the experiencing subject,
> or as the interaction of a subject and object that
> exist separate from their interaction. Instead,
> Deweys view is radically empirical (PCAP 437).
> Stuhr further explains that in this radically
> empirical view, experience is an activity in which
> subject and object are unified and constituted as
> partial features and relations within this ingoing,
> unanalyzed unity.
>
> As Dewey himself says in The Need for a Recovery of
> Philosophy, this problem only exists because it is
> assumed that there is a knower in general, who is
> outside of the world to be known, and who is defined
> in terms antithetical to the traits of the world
> (PCAP 449). Or, as William James puts it in A World
> of Pure Experience, the first great pitfall from
> which a radical standing by experience will save us
> is an artificial conception of the relations between
> knower and known. Throughout the history of
> philosophy the subject and its object have been
> treated as absolutely discontinuous entities and
> their relations have assumed a paradoxical
> character which all sorts of theories had to be
> invented to overcome (PCAP 184).
>
> Or, as the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
> (http://plato.stanford.edu/) says in their article
> on James, he set out the metaphysical view most
> commonly known as neutral monism, according to
> which there is one fundamental stuff that is
> neither material nor mental (SEP 2).
>
> Gents, how many times and how many ways do I have to
> say it? These quotes, from four different
> philosophers, demonstrate in unequivocal terms that
> we are NOT prisoners to SOM. Obviously, James and
> Dewey are directly attacking SOM and the
> commentators see them that way too.
>
> I really don't understand why you feel the need to
> dismiss this or explain it away. Why shouldn't
> MOQers be thrilled that Pirsig has company in this?
> Seriously. Why?
>
> Oh, never mind. I give up. I can't MAKE you think
> otherwise. All I can do is show you and I've already
> done that too many times.
>
> Sigh.
>
> dmb
>
> P.S. Yes, these quotes were copied from my word
> processor. If the text is messy, that's why.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------
> > Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:22:55 -0500
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [MD] Mindless Metaphysics
> >
> > Dmb:
> > James and Dewey are non-SOM philosophers and
> that's my main point.
> > Their work is proof that there are non-SOM
> alternatives at the
> > intellectual level.
> >
> > Ron:
> > The angle is that they are SOM philosophers, they
> were born and bred in
> > western culture, they use English, a subject
> object case language to
> > describe non-analytic alternatives. They project
> a paradigm outside
> > Of the cultural normative thought structure, James
> and Dewey offer
> > Radical inclusion to analytic empirical method.
> They contend that no
> > Data is strictly objective and factual, It is all
> colored by cultural
> > And personal bias.
> > It is the realization that we can not trust
> ourselves to objectively
> > Evaluate any data absolutely, we may however
> reduce error by applying
> > A radical empiricism.
> > It is a refinement of SOM methods, it is truer via
> James own convictions
> > Of any new idea's test is the compatibility with
> former ideas.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
_________________________________________________________________
> > Put your friends on the big screen with Windows
> Vista(r) + Windows
> > Live(tm).
> >
>
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_
> > CPC_MediaCtr_bigscreen_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/
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Get the power of Windows + Web with the new Windows
> Live.
>
http://www.windowslive.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_powerofwindows_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/
>
Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now.
www.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail
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/
