Bo: I don't know if the problem has anything to do with english being your second language or what, but I'm not pretending. I really can't make any sense of your sentences. And you keep insisting that James didn't say or do things that I've quoted him saying and doing, so apparently you can't make sense of his sentences either. I mean, he attacks SOM in exactly those terms, in terms of subjects and objects.
So, I am hereby officially giving up. Its just too frustrating. But I wish you well, dmb ---------------------------------------- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:01:58 +0100 > Subject: Re: [MD] Mindless Metaphysics > > DMB, Krimel? and moqtalk. > > On 13 Jan. > >> dmb says: >> This is a good example. I can't make any sense of these sentences. A >> point of view from outside itself? Intelligence from SOM's premises? >> The logic of the new Quality idea? The Q premises? I honestly don't >> know what these phrases are supposed to mean... > > It's easy to fake bewilderment, but we are here to explore new > territory not to ... (LILA) > > It's very easy to spend your whole life swishing old tea > around in your cup thinking it's great stuff because you've > never really tried anything new, because you could never > get it in, because the old stuff prevented its entry because > you were so sure the old stuff was so good .. etc. > > And if you don't understand what "The logic of the Quality Idea" > and/or "Q premises" mean. Phew! > >> I keep trying to tell you that the existence of thought systems like >> the MOQ and are living proof that SOM is not the only way to >> conceptualize reality. But you keep finding ever more bizarre ways to >> dismiss this. For example. > > I don't deny that there are ways to conceptualize reality other > than through the S/O mesh.The MOQ is the prime example, but > it's not an intellectual pattern, but the master-pattern that has > intellect as a sub-pattern. > > Look to this "koan" from LILA: > > The Metaphysics of Quality translates it: While sustaining > biological and social patterns Kill all intellectual patterns. > Kill them completely > > If the MOQ is an intellectual pattern, do you think it contemplates > suicide? It's plain that intellect is the greatest obstacle to > understanding the Quality Idea. > > All this is based on your inter-intellect (SOM) view that - since the > 4th. level is called "intellectual" - its characteristic is thinking and > its patterns are "thought systems". Why does it not sink in that > ancient (social level) people had great thought systems > conceptualized through the social mesh. Because it shows that > the S/O conceptualizing arrived with the intellectual level? > >> dmb says: >> The "undifferentiated aesthetic continuum" is Northrop's phrase and >> James's term is "pure experience" but both of them may be compared to >> DQ. And James does use the terms "static" and "dynamic". Pirsig >> mentions this on page 365 of Lila, which is at the end of chapter 29. >> "Pure experience cannot be called either physical or psychical: it >> logically precedes this distinction. > > About James insights I agree that he conceived the notion of a > pure experience that gave rise to concepts, and also that (he > said) that pure experience "cannot be called either physical or > physical", but he did not say that "concepts" makes up the > subject/object divide. Thus he neither formulated a SOM nor a > MOE (metaphysics of experience). Picking nits of course > >> In his last unfinished work, 'Some Problems of Philosophy', James had >> condensed this description to a single sentence: 'There must always be >> a discrepancy between concepts and reality, because the former are >> static and discontinuous while the latter is dynamic and flowing.' Here >> James had chosen exactly the same words Phaedrus had used for the basic >> subdivision of the Metaphysics of Quality." > > See a mere Reality/Concept divide, while Pirsig's first embryonic > MOQ was "Pre-intellectual /Intellectual" with the latter =the S/O > divide (or aggregate). This was carried over to the Romantic/ > Classic moq where "classic" (clearly a forerunner for Static) is > called "intellectual" and S/O-divided > >> Further, James did not stay >> in SOM. That's exactly what he was fighting with his radical >> empiricism. On page 364-5, Pirsig describes James's radical empiricism. >> "By this he meant that subjects and objects are not the starting points >> of experience. Subjects and objects are secondary. They are concepts >> derived from something more fundamental which he described as 'the >> immediate flux of life which furnishes the material to our later >> reflection with its conceptual categories'." > > As said James did not split concepts into subject and object (or > psychic and physical) that's Pirsig interpreting James, thus he > didn't identify the SOM and that was the first necessary step. Had > James done that in addition to sketching a MOE (if only similar to > Pirsig's "pre-intellectual/Intellectual" one) you would have a case. > > DMB: >> Having said that, I'd urge you to read those cumbersome posts. 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. > > I always read your posts. On the Pegasus they come through in > order, it's just in the archives. > > Bo > > > PS > My computer know-how isn't much better. The said button is on > the mail program, not on the computer itself. I had this problem > before I was made aware of it (by Magus Berg) I recommend a > free mail program called "Pegasus" it comes in several sizes but > all have a "copies to self" folder where one can see how posts > look before being sent off ... plus having the said "rich text" > button. There are instances when it looks OK and yet the lines > may have gone amok, the message must be re-opened and the > "rich text" activated and de-activated to mend it. > > > > > > > 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/ _________________________________________________________________ Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live. http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_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/
