DMB
28 Jan. 2009 at 13:01, david buchanan wrote:
> Marsha said:
> I am concerned that the patterns are seen as independent (inherently
> existing) entities, just a new name for objects. This I think is the
> wrong view. RMP has stated that there are no thing-in-themselves in
> the MOQ, and he has mentioned Buddhism and emptiness, though he has
> not stated my interpretation directly. Bo replied: ...all patterns are
> static quality and in the Q context they are independent and exists
> very much in themselves.
I have spoken to Marsha before, she will possibly understand that
it's the Quality/Concept fallacy that creates the puzzle .
> dmb says:No, Bo. Marsha is right. You've distorted the MOQ so that is
> merely becomes a new kind of objectivity or, as I've tried to explain
> it to you previously, a new kind of essentialism.....
New objectivity? The Subject/Object distinction is abolished as
reality's ground it's YOU who upholds SOM by using it as your
reference frame? Essentialism? Well I guess Pirsig sees Quality
as essential and I have traced Ham's as similar to ZAMM's initial
insight of an "essence" that precedes the subject and object
dualism. He (Ham) doesn't want to be compared to anyone of
course, he is down from "The Mount" with new stone tablets.
> .... This mistake goes to the heart of your SOL and so it's no wonder
> that Pirsig rejects that misinterpretation.
The SOL has little to do with this issue - it concerns the intellectual
level - but if you must. Pirsig has nullified the initial rejection of the
SOL. He did so in the Paul Turner letter by admitting that the 4th.
level emerged with the Greeks ("Greek" in the MOQ means SOM)
Besides he has said to me that if the SOL has quality it will
percolate to the top, and now it's just your perfunctory "rejection" of
it that remains.
> This wouldn't be so offensive if you didn't keep insisting that
> everybody else is so wrong about the MOQ, including Pirsig himself. Ask
> yourself a question. How strange it is to reject even the author's own
> view?
I would not think that you, a political liberal, would be so
indoctrinated regarding philosophy. Besides exactly half of LILA
supports the SOL and - also - remember Pirsig's final words in the
PT letter: "This is no Pope Bull", he knows that he would be
superhuman to leave every single word immutable. The MOQ is a
phenomenal achievement, but like the last metaphysics shift - the
Aretê/SOM - SOM went through countless changes from Plato to
Descartes, Kant & Co. but remained SOM all the way.
IMO
Bo
.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Windows Live Hotmail®
more than just e-mail.
> http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_hm_justgotbette
> r_howitworks_012009 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/
>
>
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/
