> > [Krimel] > > The answer to that is so patently obvious it hardly deserves > > consideration. > > We strive to survive because we are descended from survivors. It > really > > is > > that simple. We have built into our DNA mechanisms, urges, emotions > and > > needs that facilitate our survival. Those who do not have this inbred > > need > > do not survive. The questions is idiotic. It's like asking why don't > we > > breath water? Survival is the imperative of all living things. Without > > it > > there would be no living things. > Platt: > A great non-answer. As Pirsig asked, "If life is strictly a result of the > physical and chemical forces of nature then why is life opposed to these > same forces in its struggle to survive?" > > Krimel's thoughtful answer, "Don't ask." > > Ron: > A non-answer to a non-question. IS life in opposition to physical and > chemical forces? or is that > one way to view its processes, or one may view it as life exploiting these > forces at every chance. > If Pirsig taught us anything it is that there is never one way to view > experience, with this in mind > one should never tout his words as authoritative gospel.
Agree. But then one should not always take the opposite view from Pirsig as gospel either. I consider Pirsig's question, "Why survive?" to be legitimate, just as the many other "why" questions he poses in Lila such as: "Why, for example, should a group of simple, stable compounds of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen struggle for billions of years to organize themselves into a professor of chemistry?" [Ron] > Quality is experience, DQ and SQ are one of many ways to describe it > linguistically. > > What should be primary in the MoQ is this. I'm pretty sure Bob's intent > was not to > construct another static giant to do battle with the old static giant > rather to see the > static giant for what it is and ones own experience for what it is. We are > the giant. > everyone of us. It may be changed, but it takes an open mind. Bo would > have another > giant an MoQ giant which "rides" the old one. To me, Pirsig states a > static giant > is not prefferable to ones own unique view. MoQ is about finding the > blossoming lotus in > in ones own experience, then one sees the blossom in all experiences. > Your question then is a SOM question. Then, it IS better not to ask > questions of this nature > because questions of this nature pull one deeper into intellectual > systems, analytical systems. > Philosophical systems which have no correspondance with immediate > experiences. > > Observing patterns and their relations is one thing, developing and > adhereing to concepts > about them as what IS is another. As Pirsig said, intellectual concepts such as a metaphysics may be degenerate, but avoiding them is also degenerate. "The only person who doesn't pollute the mystic reality of the world with fixed metaphysical meanings is a person who hasn't yet been born-and to whose birth no thought has been given. The rest of us have to settle for being something less pure. Getting drunk and picking up bar-ladies and writing metaphysics is a part of life." (Lila, 5) 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/
