Gav said to Matt and dmb: ...how about less of the melodrama and get to the 
point...us amateurs need some clarity. so is psychological nominalism saying 
that all awareness is linguistic? if so then this is not radically empirical or 
moqish to my mind...seems quite simple. how can you guys spend so many 
electrons not understanding this? i think a lot of awareness is linguistically 
filtered, most of it even, but what of novelty then? what of aesthetic arrest? 
what of meditative states, epiphanies, beauty! what about music!
dmb says:Exactly. You've hit the proverbial nail on its head. Or, at the very 
least, you've nailed one of the key points of contention. Radical Empiricism 
puts the emphasis on pre-conceptual awareness and psychological nominalism says 
all awareness is linguistic. Far from being parallel, these positions are 
approximately opposite. Both see concepts and language as a web of meanings and 
beliefs but the latter says that its analogies all the way down and the former 
says that all analogies are formed in the wake of experience. The former says 
linguistic awareness is derived from something more basic and primary, from the 
primary empirical reality. In other words, as far as I know, Rorty's brand of 
pragmatism has nothing like DQ or pure experience. The implications and 
consequences of this difference can hardly be overstated. So when discussion 
turns to the connections between DQ and mysticism, a theme that runs through 
both of of Pirsig's books as well as his own biography, neo-pragmatism has very 
little, if anything at all, to say. As far as I know, that whole dimension is 
missing from the Rorty-like approaches and I suppose its no accident that Matt 
is not very interested in that dimension either. Because he finds so little 
importance in it, I suppose, Matt thinks its no big deal to interpret radical 
empiricism in a way that does not accommodate mysticism or non-linguistic 
experience. Or maybe he even prefers it that way. Maybe its not just 
indifference. Maybe he actively wants to get of that dimension. I don't know 
but, for whatever reason, its clear that Matt does not appreciate a difference 
that "seems quite simple" to you and me.One thing that has really struck me 
lately about myths, especially the hero's journey, is that the whole trick is 
to get beyond the clashing rocks, to pierce the valley. In symbolic language, 
the task of the hero is to transcend all the pairs of opposites, all dualisms, 
all forms of one-sidedness. The great final moment of victory for the hero's 
(or hera's) journey is called a conjunction of opposites, atonement with the 
father, the sacred marriage or "Enantiodromia", which means something like 
"into the other drama" or "the dance of opposties". The yin-yang symbol is a 
picture of this dance. And this transformational moment of consciousness can be 
described in terms of developmental psychology, as in Pirsig example of the 
undifferentiated consciousness of an infant. Here we have an analog of pure 
experience, pre-conceptual experience. The innocence of the infant can't be 
sustained if he or she is to survive and so of course the differentiations of 
our linguistic awareness quickly begin to set in. We need these static patterns 
of awareness to get along in the world, obviously, but the hero's task is to 
see through them, to see that conventional reality is a conceptual arrangement, 
that concepts bifurcate the world into pairs of opposites but that reality 
itself is fundamentally and profoundly unified, that the distinction between 
yourself and reality is conceptual and verbal rather than ultimately real. Thou 
art that. And this this kind of Jungian-Campbellian psychology, not 
behaviorism, that is most compatible with the MOQ.
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Liveā„¢: Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1a_explore_042009
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/

Reply via email to