Joseph --
IMO putting existence before awareness is an acknowledgement of evolution. Awareness evolves.
The problem with "before" and "after" is that it presumes evolution, forcing the idea that physical reality is primary, which is the existentialist;s position. The continuum of time is the mode of human experience, which we intellectualize as the coming and going of events. Thus, to say that the universe evolves is fine, provided you are talking about relational existence. The acquisition of knowledge is an evolving process, of course, as is one's understanding of the physical world and its relational components. This process represents the temporal unfolding of being-aware.
However, I maintain that awareness itself is the value-sensibilty of the Knower. I base this on the fact that neither value nor awareness is an existent (i.e., capable of being localized, quantified, or objectively observed). We cannot logically attribute self-awareness or the space/time mode of its experience to reality, except as the individual's finite perspective. So we can't assume that ultimate reality (the primary essence) is subject to the space/time conditions of experiential existence.
In general, I think it can be said that those who believe in a primary source also believe in the primacy of subjective awareness. Those who deny the primary source look to evolution as the source of awareness and tend to be existentialists. I'm not sure where this places Pirsig and the Quality hierarchy. Perhaps he straddles the fence between spiritualism (valuism?) and existentialism.
Thanks for your viewpoint, Joe. Best regards, Ham 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/
