>> MP: >> My knowledge of history and especially of the history of world faiths >> is insufficient to make a statement of why (if?) skepticism is >> predominantly a Western phenomenon. But IMO, Bo, the apparent >> predominance of skepticism in Western thought is precisely a result of >> the notion that reason and faith are separable, or more so that >> separating reason and faith is somehow productive. > > Bo: > Yes, this is the very SOM conundrum that the MOQ throws a new > light on with it's level system. The 4th intellectual level is "reason", > but one fact must be noted: It was reason that created faith, just > like irrationality is rationality's necessary counterpoint and > subjectivity is objectivity's. People before this time (social level) > had no notion of their existence being "irrational".
MP: I'm pleased to see we are agreeing! As such I hesitate to question this, but I'm not sure I'd agree that reason created faith. Historically, reason evolved well after faith; the Greeks succeed the Israelites. Unless we are saying that reason created faith "as the West knows it" that is, stripped of and/or contrasted to reason. In that sense, if anything, I'd say Western faith created itself in response to a perceived attack by the "fallen angel" of reason. Faith could very well have retained reason had it not reacted in defense to but rather in concert with the rise of reason. It was a static reactionary response, and I'd argue primarily a political one not much to do with issues of the faith, and that is IMO where the trouble really began. > Bo: > The social level's era was an enormous time span without any > reason versus faith dichotomy. The known mythologies and the > many just faintly recognized and the countless "world views" we > have no idea about weren't considered "faith" or "religion" because > there were no reason to make this distinction. I guess you need > not be told this but there are so many "somists" who just see > history as a slow evolution of mind - of reason out of superstition. MP: And it is no surprise then that SOMism is a distinctly western affliction. > Bo: > Now I was about to launch on my other special field, namely how > the MOQ reconciles faith and reason, subject and object in a way > that let us have the cake and eat it, but that will have to wait. MP: I would very much like to embark on such a discussion. I see tremendous potential for restoring the faith/reason schism through MoQ, but also see a serious pitfall. And there is also the question of why MoQ and not Zen or Tao? Is MoQ not merely a tempest in an SOM teacup? MP ---- "Don't believe everything you think." 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/
