At 12:59 PM 9/15/2008, you wrote:
Hi Marsha --
Responding to my critique of Pirsig's metaphysics (or its absence), you asked:
In an existence where everything is interrelated and ever-changing
which direction would a first cause come from? It looks to me like
it would come from these collections of patterns called self, egos.
And I've said before, "first" and "last" are intellectual precepts
of causality that frame one's experience. From a metaphysical
perspective, all is One, and there is no sequence of events. When
we speak causally, it is always in reference to sequential existence
(i.e., SOM). So, when I said that Pirsig "cannot account for the
cause of experiential reality",
I meant "cause" in the evolutionary way that we intellectualize
reality, which translates to "source" in the metaphysical
sense. Understanding existence metaphysically is not a matter of
knowing "'which came first" but, rather, how it is derived from the
primary source. There is only one metaphysical cause -- the first
or primary -- and it is constant..
"Ego" is a psychological term relating to one's self-esteem or
motivational drive. "Self" (or "proprietary awareness") is the more
appropriate term in the epistemological context of your
question. And since being-aware equates to one's experience of the
world, subjectivity and objectivity arise concurrently. One does
not precede the other, but (as with all differentiation) both are
"caused" by the sensibility/otherness dichotomy. Creation is not a
series of events ("patterns"?) from alpha to omega, but the
negational mode of Essence. From the human perspective, however, it
is the ongoing process intellectualized as "evolution".
Just as Pirsigians look at reality as a patterned distribution of
Quality, I see reality as a finite differentiation of Essence.
The patterned distribution of static quality or Quality? Static
quality is definition. Quality is beyond definition, at least that
is my understanding. The terms 'primary' and 'first cause' both are
definition making them static. It seems to me that you are trying to
reify Quality.
Interrelated causes and multiple conditions. How can these be tracked?
While I think there is something in your theory that explains, to
some extent, the conceptualization process, most of it makes no sense
to me. Thanks for the response, but the reification of Quality is a no-no.
Marsha
.
.
Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.
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/
