Bodvar: Language certainly existed as a social pattern, but it was NOT "..turned into a rational philosophical distinction" (whatever that means) It was turned into an mindish superstructure above an material world. This was intellect's objective "logos over mythos", later came its subjective "mythos-over-logos". And the paradox- producing "see-saw" has run ever since.
Andre: Hi Bodvar, this "..turned into a rational philosophical distinction" can this be the process whereby the dialectical mode of reasoning developed itself from the rhetoric.(Pirsig is clear that rhetoric came before dialectic). And thereby giving itself an 'intellectual' status (of truth seeking rather than good seeking)? Bodvar: I know that James, Pirsig and DMB do, but Phaedrus did NOT speak about concepts or mind. To equalize DQ and "mind" is adopting intellect's premises: DQ the "thing in itself" that our mind makes into a "thing for us". Pirsig agreeing with James' regarding "before subjects and objects (S/O=mind/matter) was the step out of SOM, but "before mind" was a step back into SOM. Andre: DQ is ineffable.It is not a concept. It is useful as a term as it allows reference to 'conceptual unknowns' but to treat it as some kind of philosophic object is to pervert the purpose for which the statement; 'DQ as the 'continually changing flux of immediate reality', is intended. dmb toBodvar: In effect, Pirsig does say that DQ is pre-conceptual even back in ZAMM. Bodvar: He does not "in effect" say that. You want to make ZAMM a conceptual mind-theory about the real experience (the Q-evels) This is the SOM that the MOQ is supposed to trash. Andre: It is variously described; Quality is an event (p233), the 'leading edge' (p277), quality is 'the track' (p276). I'll stick with the statement made above: it is ineffable. So it is neither. Rather, to stay in line with the MoQ: quality is the event from which concepts and even pre-concepts (as a conceptualisation) are deduced. Bodvar: Mythos and logos is "society" and intellect, but fast-forward to the MOQ where the inorganic level is DQ's first creation. You and so many want everything to take place on the intellectual level regarded a concept-idea realm - the MOQ another idea - and this requires some strange logical loops. Andre: As mentioned in another post, intellect sees everything 'in hind-sight' through its capacity to 'reflect' . 'He simply meant that at the cutting edge of time, before an object can be distinguished, there must be some kind of nonintellectual awareness, which he called awareness of Quality. You can't be aware that you've seen a tree until after you've seen the tree, and between the instant of vision and instant of awareness there must be a time lag....Reality is always the moment of vision before the intellectualisation takes place. There is no other reality. This preintellectual reality is what Phaedrus felt he had properly identified as Quality' (ZMM p 241) Now, does this 'time lag', this change from 'the moment of vision' to 'intellectual awareness' distort 'reality' into 'concepts', idea(lisations), intellectual constructions? Carrying this a little further: are we always 'one step behind'... 'out of kilter' with our verbalisations/ intellectualisations of it (reality) through the linguistic processes of generalisation, distortion and deletion? Does this relate, in any way, to the Buddhist sense of 'suffering'? Just exploring. Andre 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/
