DMB, Steve, Moqtalk.
11 Feb. DMB wrote:
Steve cites Bo:
> > > "Metaphysics" is a concept invented by SOM's instigator Aristotle and
> > > is supposed to mean the deepest possible theory ABOUT reality, meaning
> > > that such subjective theorizing don't have the least influence on
> > > objective reality. ...The MOQ definition of metaphysics is as Pirsig
> > > says in LILA (before he went on to denounce it) that no-one can avoid
> > > metaphysics, meaning that their explanation of reality is reality
> > > itself.
Steve:
> > Aha! Here it is. I think we've stumbled on the root of the problem
> > with SOLAQI. I never had a problem with your claim that S/O
> > distinctions as fundamental to the intellectual level. It is the
> > taking the MOQ out side the 4th level that I could never understand. You
> > do this because you think of SOM and the MOQ not as separate
> > philosophies but as different realities. ...
Bo comments:
Not different realities, Look, while SOM ruled value was
subjective (i.e. a SOM sub-set). In a MOQ world SOM (robbed of
its metaphysical rank) has become a quality subset (the
intellectual level).
> > [Pirsig] does say, "no one can escape metaphysics," but no where does he
> > imply as far as I can tell that an explanation of reality is reality
> > itself. In fact I don't think that anyone really suffers from this
> > confusion. Not even you.
For example do you think the indians (Dusenberg) went to the
peyote ceremony if they doubted the reality that was revealed?
Come on Steve.
> > Pirsig in fact supports the mystic opposition which says that
> > "Metaphysics is not reality. Metaphysics is names about reality.
> > Metaphysics is a restaurant where they give you a thirty-thousand page
> > menu and no food." That's why the MOQ can sit comfortably in the
> > intellectual level along with every other pattern of thought.
I said ..."before he went on to denounce it".
-------------------------------
DMB says:
> That makes sense. No wonder I never saw the problem.
What makes sense? Steve's? And what "problem"?
> As I see it, Bo can continue to construe Pirsig as denouncing and
> reversing himself or he can entertain the possibility that he's been
> working with some serious misconceptions.
With the MOQ a mere theory about Quality Pirsig worked himself
into a serious misconception. It manifests as a QUALITY//DQ/SQ
metaphysics, and and so on in an infinite regress.
> It does seem more likely than not. If Bo is right then even Pirsig is
> wrong about the MOQ. What are the odds of that? On top of the
> misconception Steve patiently untangled here, there also seem to be
> something unusual about Bo's conception of SOM. And his use of the word
> "value" points to a third. There are probably more, but the centrality
> of these three terms is such that any misconception will have a wide
> reaching effect.
Remember Pirsig's final words in the Turner letter about his
words no Papal Bull? A signal for us to examine the MOQ and if
weaknesses are found they must be revealed, not act like
defenders of a holy text. The MOQ has the potentiality to turn
current philosophy to trash, but for that to happen only the SOL
interpretation works. And it's not my private creation, but derived
from Pirsig's texts.
> But there is a sense in which we do create reality. The static
> reality, all the stuff referenced in a complete encyclopedia, is a
> creation. Think of the Quine piece recently posted, where material
> objects are compared to Homeric gods.
"We create"? It's DQ that creates. Mankind was not present until
the late biological stage. This is the old "what comes first" debate
from Paul Turner's time. If the fact that all theories are "man-
made" means that reality is "man-made", or conveyed by
language means that all is "just language" not much can be said.
Anyway, only with the 4th level did "objects" arrive, this does not
mean that the objective realm is particularly shaky, the subjective
realm is just as unfounded. Yet, the S/O distinction itself is the
highest and best static value.
IMO
Bo
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/
