Greetings, Khoo Hock --
> Much of the Metaphysics of Quality is about establishing a
social/cultural-free view of the universe which establishes
the fundamental premise for morality. Again, what is good
and what is bad. Values; what is right and what is wrong.
It may be synchronicity that gave rise to the Karen Armstrong's
Axial Age which occurred independently in four different regions
during the Axial Age, a pivotal period lasting from 900 B.C. to
200 B.C., producing Taoism and Confucianism in China,
Buddhism and Hinduism in India, Judaism in the Middle East
and philosophic rationalism in Greece.
[snip]
From Pirsig's view and that of the Metaphysics of Quality,
this world has been in a state of Arrested Development.
If we keep going back to the circular argumentation that
the intellectual state is the highest level of evolution and
that the logical intellect is the only form, then we will always
be back where we started; the separation of the individual
from the universe.
The promise of the Axial Age has been interrupted by the
second "mundane" transformation, a case of Quality,
Interrupted, if you must.
A most impressive post.
I have read Karen Armstrong ("A History of God") and recently viewed Paul
David's 'Jesus in India' on TV. I'm not convinced that the Axial Age is all
that significant to philosophical development, although scholars have cited
identical phrases in the Parables and the Veda which indicate that Jesus at
least became familiar with the tenets of Hinduism and Buddhism, if not
actually visiting India, during the "lost years" before returning to
Palestine to teach a new religion.
Considering the anti-theistic mindset of Pirsig and his followers, however,
Christendom has no place in the MoQ. This is not to say that spirituality
is not a central element of Pirsig's thesis, albeit disguised as
aesthetic/moral Quality or a collective form of Intellect. Unfortunately,
as you astutely point out, this leaves us with a philosophy that is flawed
by "the separation of the individual from the universe." Man's only
acknowledged link to universal existence is said to be "experience", and the
author has made no epistemological distinction between organic experience (a
"collection of patterns") and proprietary (psychic) sensibility. In short,
the MoQ dismisses the essential nature of the individual which is that of a
free, value-sensible agent.
I feel your frustration with these "circular arguments", Khoo. And I second
your motion: "Please, for heaven's sake, don't waste any more time. Get on
with it!"
Essentially yours,
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/
