At 04:21 PM 11/15/2008, you wrote:
Hi Marsha,
> >[Andre]
> > > Apologies dear members of Discuss:
> > >
> > > After just having sent my reaction to Platt concerning praise for
> Bodvar,
> > > I
> > > realise that I have omitted to mention the most important thing of
> all:
> > > be
> > > aware that the MoQ places us also in a 'state of trance". In other
> words
> > > the
> > > MoQ is also a 'trance state'.
> > >
> > > 'The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.
> > > The name that can be named [it] is not the eternal name.
> > > The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth.
> > > The named is the mother of ten thousand things.'
> > >
> > > I may be going off on my rockers now but suggest an interpretation
> of
> > > this:
> > > The first line refers to Quality... this fits (Undefinable).
> > > Second line refers to DQ/SQ?
> > > The third line refers to SQ?
> > > The fourth line refers to DQ?
> > >
> > > This leads me to think that the MoQ is also a trance state. It is a
> > > reflection/interpretation of Quality but not Quality itself.
[Platt]
> >Good point. The MOQ as a rigid interpretation of experience, like any
> other
> >single-minded conceptual framework, would qualify as a trance state.
> But
> >here's the thing about the MOQ. It says that reality is prior to
> conception
> >and is therefore immediate, intuitive, undeliberate and involuntary. To
> me
> >the word "trance" assumes a conceptual framework of some sort that
> filters
> >direct experience. So in that way I would distinguish the MOQ from being
> a
> >trance state, just as I would distinguish the mystic understanding of
> >reality (ineffable) from the conventional one (symbolic)
> >
> >What do you think?
[Marsha]
> I agree with you, but what would the Science Inquisitor say?
My guess is that she would say what Pirsig believed she would say, namely:
"The first are the philosophers of science, most particularly the group
known as logical positivists, who say that only the natural sciences can
legitimately investigate the nature of reality, and that metaphysics is
simply a collection of unprovable assertions that are unnecessary to the
scientific observation of reality. For a true understanding of reality,
metaphysics is too 'mystical.'"
Greetings Platt,
Dogma by any other name. The Science Inquisitor defends dogma as did
Heinrich Kramer persecute in the name of religious doctrine. "It's
Science, therefore it must be closer to Truth". Baloney! And there
are some here who seem to yield too quickly.
Marsha
.
.
The Universe is uncaused, like a net of jewels in which each is a
reflection of all the others in a fantastic, interrelated harmony without end.
.
.
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/
