Ron:
> > When Pirsig explains that everything is an analogy
> > I take this to include all human perception as
> well, not simply language.
Magnus:
> Where did he say that? I don't agree. Analogies are
> level 4 stuff. Only level 4
> has the capability to represent anything else. Every
> pattern below level 4 is
> *not* an analogy, it just is in itself and there's
> no pattern just like it, it's unique.
SA: Quoting ZMM Chapter 30 as follows:
"Phædrus has been talking about as Quality,
Socrates appears to have described as the soul,
self-moving, the source of all things. There is no
contradiction. There never really can be between the
core terms of monistic philosophies. The One in India
has got to be the same as the One in Greece. If it's
not, you've got two. The only disagreements among the
monists concern the attributes of the One, not the One
itself. Since the One is the source of all things and
includes all things in it, it cannot be defined in
terms of those things, since no matter what thing you
use to define it, the thing will always describe
something less than the One itself. The One can only
be described allegorically, through the use of
analogy, of figures of imagination and speech."
SA continues:
Magnus, I understand intellect can analogize the
other levels, but I think the other levels
(biological, etc...) are analogies of dynamic quality.
I also found this quote from ZMM that discusses this
analogy method of "all things". Pertaining to "...the
One is the source of all things and includes all
things in it... since no matter what thing you use to
define it, the thing will always describe something
less than the One itself." "All things" are included
in the One, yet defining in terms of any "thing", such
as any static pattern on any level, the "thing", such
as a rock, does not define "the One", which I would
say "the One" is dynamic quality, which is undefinable
and each static pattern happens in accord with dynamic
quality. This goes along with how each static pattern
experiences, which Marsha said she would try to
describe this "experiencing" aspect of spov's, but I'm
not sure if she has or not according to how she views
this "experience".
I guess it depends on what one means by analogy.
The way I think about analogy is that dynamic quality
being the primary reality and static patterns come
about from dq. Thus, any spov is dq, but to hold the
integrity of dq's undefinableness any sq coming from
dq, even inorganic patterns, are not dq, but are dq.
Are not dq, but are analogies of dq helps provide the
distinction between spov that are from dq. At least
that's how I understand this. By the way, this is
also how intellectual patterns are morally better
analogies than say inorganic patterns. Yet, the speed
of evolution on any one level is relative to the
level, so, in terms of time, lower levels seem to
involve themselves in very, very good analogies (they
stick around and every nature lover knows how nature
can inspire awe throughout ones life-time).
cold wind shakes the choke-cherry tree,
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
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/
