Ham:

> > [Ham, to Ron]:
> > Aren't you simply saying that shared experience leads to
> > knowledge "by consensus", while proprietary experience
> > cannot be universally validated?
> 
> [Platt]:
> > To clarify -- any difference between "proprietary" and
> > "individual" experience?
> 
> No, none at all.   I throw in "proprietary" once in a while as a reminder
> that all awareness is subjective (a word that Pirsigians dislike).  But it
> hasn't done any good.

Thanks. If your assumption is the world consists of subjects and objects, 
then you'll get no argument that all awareness is subjective. But, if your 
assumption is the world consists of static patterns of quality and dynamic 
quality, well then . . .

> What these comments tell me is that 'proprietary' has no meaning in
> Pirsig's 
> scheme of things.  The individual, like awareness, knowledge and
> intellect, 
> is just a pattern (or patterns) of cosmic quality without any cosmic 
> significance.

No sure what you mean by "cosmic significance."  

>  They've discounted subjectivity -- the experiential locus
> of 
> reality -- and made it a byproduct of nature and collective society. 

Don't think so --- just started with a different assumption about the 
fundamental nature of reality. 

> Whatever value or morality means relates to the universe, not to man. 
> Existence (their God) moves in strange ways toward "betterness", and we
> must 
> latch on to the collective intellect if we are to keep up.

I think you'll agree its better to have an inquisitive, logical mentality 
that a collective, tribal one. The Pirsig's"intellectual level" consists of 
the former.  

> Sorry to be so negative, Platt.  Occasionally something is said here that
> makes sense to me.  But it's a rare occasion, indeed, and it invariably 
> leads to "clarification" according to "Pirsig says".  They think the MoQ
> overcomes the wall between awareness and beingness, but try walking
> through 
> that wall.  We live and move in a world differentiated by being-aware.  We
> are hard-wired to experience by that dichotomy.  Only intuitive logic can
> rise above experiential existence and allow a conception of ultimate 
> reality.  Unfortunately, it isn't found in Pirsig's Quality heirarchy.

I disagree, but you may be right, of course. As you know I like your 
emphasis on the individual. And I always look forward to your posts because 
of their high quality. :-) 

Best regards,
Platt
 
 

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/

Reply via email to