Ham:
> If Quality (i.e., Value) is our pre-intellectual
sensibility, as
> Pirsig says, than what we
> intellectualize as a physical world is constructed
> of Value, not the other way around.
SA: Yes. Now to put this further into the way I see
this. The pre-intellectual, the value before we
construct intellectually, is what is meant by
experience. Thus, experience, as I understand the
moq, is of this pre-intellectual reality, called
primary reality. This experience is why I mentioned
to Jorge, that his meaning/definition of what
experience is, is different than how I definition
experience. Ham, your definition of experience is
locked in human sensibility, as well, it seems. I see
experience as the same as saying presence. Thus, a
rock has presence - thus an experience, though
obviously an experience different from a humans
experience. It is called rock experience. So, it is
not I relating this "backwards". It is your
understanding of the moq, and thus your assumptions
that interpret the moq in a "backwards" way.
old news,
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
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/
