Ian, Impressive... There is an interesting juxtaposition between the concept of dance and all these words. I would never claim not to think some event/process, even a linguistic type, is not dance.
Marsha -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ian Glendinning Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 1:49 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [MD] Let's Dance ? Marsha and all, I posted that meeting of minds "dance" YouTube link to another discussion group and got a vey long and interesting Lila / Pirsig-related response, without any prompting. >From Ted .... START i am getting into 'Lila' (robert pirsig, author of zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance), as a delayed response to your recommendation some time ago, and in watching 'meeting of the minds', one can see the different approaches to understanding that pirsig ably brings into a connecting framework in his writings (e.g. by way of the trio of mysticism, metaphysics and science). what is not present, in galison's 'meeting of the minds' videoclip, however, is a connecting framework of the type pirsig devlops based on the notion of 'quality' which precedes subject and object and thus goes beyond notions such as 'two-way-causation'. this dissonant quality is the primary experience, ... and descriptions or judgements about it are derivative intellectual constructs, such as 'the stove we are sitting on is the cause of it'. the quality of space that induces horses to move closer together when 'it is cold' and farther apart when 'it is warm' is a basic experience that precedes our intellectual descriptions and judgements which we typically formulate in terms of 'what things do' (i.e. in terms of notional local systems with notional locally originating behaviours). 'quality' or 'harmony' or 'resonance' (which induces wildgeese to fly in formation) is a direct experience, and so is giambattista vico's implied 'quality of space' that induces primitive man to seek shelter in the turbulence of a thunderstorm. the intellectual description and judgement comes afterwards, it is not the experience. in his terms, i believe it was that ''expression' precedes (individual-) experience' which would imply that expression is 'pure experience' or 'quality' that lies between 'subject' and 'object'; i.e. that lies between 'inhabitant' and 'habitat'. in the terms that i have been using, this 'quality' is the 'conjugate- habitat-inhabitant-relation' which is a dynamical one-ness, which our intellectual descriptions and judgements start off by breaking into 'two' and then struggling to relate the two. our noun-based or 'being-based' language forces us to do this breaking into two since it is single issue at a time and incapable of directly conveying, what the inhabitants are doing and how the habitat is, at the same time, undergoing spatial-relational transformation. the poem about the folks sitting around a fire, each with a piece of wood that they were reluctant to throw on illustrated how their focus on their interpersonal issues and actions, occluded from view or 'demoted from its natural over-riding precedence' in their 'view' and internal reasoning (in terms of local systems with local agency that act/ interact in absolute logical space), the quality of space they all shared inclusion in, hence the disagreements amongst them which caused them to withhold throwing their wood on the fire resulted in them all freezing to death. anyhow, the 'meeting of the minds' videoclip is interesting, in its effectiveness in showing the common acknowledgement, across art and science, of 'holes' in our scientific view, ... which different disciplines tend to 'plug' in their different ways (mostly with jargon such as 'far-from-equilibrium thermodynamics' or 'bifurcation at quark level' etc.) pirsig's 'metaphysics of quality', seeks to bridge between the mystic understanding (e.g. in zen, and in native visionquests) and the scientific understanding, but as he notes, the notion of metaphysics' is 'put down' by 'both sides'. the mystics claim that 'thought is not a path to reality' (and metaphysics they say is based on thought while pirsig would say it is based in quality), and the scientists claim that 'metaphysics' is too mystical and that science is the only legitimate investigator of reality. still, while the dancers let themselves fall into the harmony that dissolves the difference between subject-and-object, inhabitant-and- habitat, we are predominantly a thinking culture and the holes remain (the confusing of idealisation for reality) and the incoherence grows and we are unlikely to re-popularize peyote/LSD and visionquests). pirsig elicited a big interest in his 'metaphysics of quality' bridging, but not much real 'take-up', it seems. postscript. ---i might add that my understanding, in common with pirsig's it would seem, is that in no sense are my words intending to 'tell it the way it is', but to recount and compare differing ways to frame and allude to this elusive experiencing of quality that lies deeper that 'i/we' and 'you/they', science and mysticism being two options. it seems to me as if the view of an inherently connected world; e.g. a fluid-dynamical world or holoflux as pribram termed it, is starting to show itself by way of the coherency across many theories and observations. in fact, view and show itself are inappropriate terms since we cannot see a world in flux that includes ourselves, we can only be aware of our inclusion. pirsig 'hits the mark' in my view, in noting that 'quality' (in my terms 'caring') is immediate experience (choiceless awareness in howard's terms) that 'precedes thought and language'; i.e. in Lila, he says; Thought is not a path to reality. It sets obstacles in that path because when you try to use thought to approach something that is prior to thought your thinking does not carry you towards that something. It carries you away from it. To define something is to subordinate it to a tangle of intellectual relationships. And when you do that you destroy real understanding. if we bring into connection david bohms idea that science is a perceptual enterprise and that thinking is an extension of perception, together with galisons observation that human sense perception is by way of lensing whereby we cannibalize the wave spectrum, ... we are led back to dennis gabors theory of communications wherein, he pointed out that photography or the cinematic view (a time-sequence of frames that depict the local state of affairs) reduces our view to one that is based solely on the intensity of the signal and discards the (spatial-relational) phase information. this reduces the holoflux to a flat-screen cinematic view; i.e. in gabors metaphor, it reduces the rotating field (e.g. circulatory flow in the atmosphere) to a rotating vector (the apparently local pinwheel view of the hurricane). by this reduction, in our mental playbacks, we need consider only the time sequence of framed flatscreen images which imply that the state of affairs in the present frame (each moment) depends only on the state of affairs in the immediate past. it is not hard to recognize that this mental processing of our sense perception, which as poincaré notes we have built into the foundations of mathematical physics, is a linearizing technique which reduces the conjugate habitat-inhabitant relation of the relational spatial volume implicit in a rotating field-flow to a time sequence of snapshots of a rotating local vector (the pinwheel image of the hurricane). the conjugate habitat-inhabitant relation, when applied to our selves, denies us the possibility of seeing an image of ourselves since, like the convection cell in the flow, we can only have an awareness of our inclusional situation, we cant get outside of it to look at it. this awareness would seem to correspond to the quality that pirsig writes about which is pre-intellectual and pre-lingual. if we find ourselves in a forest fire or in a flood, we have a choiceless awareness (in howards terms) of quality that relates to our spatial-relational situational inclusion; i.e. to our conjugate habitat-inhabitant relational essence. our phonetic language, being based on structures built up from elemental bits of being, lends itself to renderings in terms of local images that are in turn foundational to the perceptual enterprise otherwise known as science (bohm). of course, our culture recognizes all kinds of problems of the sort; - we have used coal-fired hot water heaters to wash our white linens that have become sooty and soiled, and then hang them on the line to dry; -we have organised the machinery of our corporations and public and private enterprises towards the achievement of productive results as if this transpired in absolute fixed and empty space, rather than in a natural space wherein, like the fish in the lake, the inhabiting agent and the habitat are in conjugate relation; -we have awarded a nobel prize in economics to joseph stiglitz for his observation that free-market economies often do not serve us well because they incur unnaccounted-for externalities that others must pay for (exhausting of resources and pollution of the common space we share inclusion in) . in our literature, we have celebrated the quality of giving that transcends the gifts as in O. Henrys The Gift of the Magi where Della, without any money to buy her husband Jim a gift at Christmas, sells her long beautiful hair to buy him a $20 chain for his prized pocket watch, given to him by his father while Jim, without any money to buy his wife a gift at Christmas, sells his watch to buy her a beautiful set of tortoise-shell combs for her lovely knee-length brown hair. the picture of a short-haired della giving jim the watch-chain while the watchless jim gives della the haircombs, and the two of them smiling and embracing implies that caring is a quality that does not originate within beings and their actions/interactions but is harmony that is in the natural world that can orchestrate our individual and collective behaviours in the manner that spatial flow resonances orchestrate the individual and collective behaviours of wildgeese that manifest in the form of their flock-flying, and which we describe in terms of their cooperation and caring, as if the dynamics were describable in terms of their local being and their local agency. the o.henry story, the wildgeese story, the hurricane story, all testify to the fact that the world dynamic is not a mechanical dynamic operationalized by notional local beings with local agency, but one in which there is a fluid-drive which orchestrates the dynamics of individuals and collectives, these individuals and collectives being identified as local beings with local agency but which are themselves gatherings within the energy- field-flow (fluid-drive). the gift of the magi is this genius that is the flux-drive that not only orchestrates the behaviour of dynamical forms but creates them. as emerson says in the method of nature; The method of nature: who could ever analyze it? That rushing stream will not stop to be observed. We can never surprise nature in a corner; never find the end of a thread; never tell where to set the first stone. The bird hastens to lay her egg: the egg hastens to be a bird. The wholeness we admire in the order of the world, is the result of infinite distribution. Its smoothness is the smoothness of the pitch of the cataract. Its permanence is a perpetual inchoation. Every natural fact is an emanation, and that from which it emanates is an emanation also, and from every emanation is a new emanation. If anything could stand still, it would be crushed and dissipated by the torrent it resisted, and if it were a mind, would be crazed; as insane persons are those who hold fast to one thought, and do not flow with the course of nature. Not the cause, but an ever novel effect, nature descends always from above. It is unbroken obedience. The beauty of these fair objects is imported into them from a metaphysical and eternal spring. In all animal and vegetable forms, the physiologist concedes that no chemistry, no mechanics, can account for the facts, but a mysterious principle of life must be assumed, which not only inhabits the organ, but makes the organ. * * * incoherence is what we get when we confuse the perceptual enterprise (science) that casts the world dynamic in terms of notional local forms (mistaken for beings) which we impute to have local agency, and in so doing confuses idealisation for reality. as the gift of the magi suggests, the caring quality that is immanent in nature, is to local object dynamics as the rotating field is to the rotating pinwheel of the hurricane. if we follow bohms understanding, since science is a perceptual enterprise and since thinking is an extension of perception, it is science that is confusing idealisation for reality. ok, heres my take on pirsig and inclusionality. inclusionality is to do with the bridging between science and mysticism in the same sort of manner as pirsigs metaphysics of quality. mysticism puts us in touch with caring (we become one with everything), while science is a perceptual enterprise wherein thinking is an extension of perception (bohm). in a typical forum we get those who tend to lean towards mysticism as the primary ground and those who tend to lean towards science as the primary ground. as bridgers, when there is conflict between the views of mysticism and the views of science, the bridgers tend to be hated by both sides since the mystics see the bridgers views as too scientific and the scientists see the bridgers views as too mystical. pirsig does a good job of explaining why this is. (i have appended to this note, an extract from pirsigs writing where he addresses it) caring (or pirsigs quality) is neither a judgement about an experience, nor a description of an experience, it is pure experience or choiceless awareness. it is beyond intellection and language. intellection and language deal in judgements and descriptions about experience. this is the realm of thinking that, as bohm observes, is an extension of perception (appearance to the eye). the correct view can only be correct by way of popular/common belief. if most people believe that local dynamical forms such as the rotating pinwheel form of the hurricane are real, then this common belief is the basis for that reality. what goes missing in this intellectual reality, is the inherent caring in nature that ceaselessly seeks to heal spatial-relational imbalances as in the thermal energy flow (which permeates land, sea and atmosphere); i.e. the rotating field view of reality that precedes the rotating vector view. caring is not only real but it is what heals imbalances and resolves conflicts. but caring is immediate choiceless awareness that is not accessible through thought. to recall pirsig's comment on this; Thought is not a path to reality. It sets obstacles in that path because when you try to use thought to approach something that is prior to thought your thinking does not carry you towards that something. It carries you away from it. To define something is to subordinate it to a tangle of intellectual relationships. And when you do that you destroy real understanding. the implications are clear. if we want to restore caring to its natural primacy over language and intellection, we are not going to get there by reasoned argument (thought and language). bringing about an awareness of this is itself caring that is sourcing this bridging initiative called inclusionality. the tangles of intellectual relationships have certainly developed in the course of this initiative, but this happens when we confuse the metaphysics of caring for science. it is neither science (the realm of what can be captured in thought and language) nor mysticism (getting in touch with the undividedness of reality-in-nature). there is an undividedness in the rotating field-flow in the atmosphere but there is a dividedness in the context of the multiplicity of local pinwheeling forms or local rotating vectors. science, by way of its dynamic duo thought-and-language is going to go with the notion of multiple local dynamical forms for its version of reality and is thus forced to ignore the undividedness in the process. the victim of our confusing what is available to us through thought and language for reality is the choiceless aware experience we know as caring. the murder weapon is premature obfuscation since thought does not carry us towards caring (which is prior to thought) but carries us away from it. ted Excerpts from Pirsig; Metaphysics The First Philosophy Metaphysics is what Aristotle called the First Philosophy. Its a collection of the most general statements of a hierarchical structure of thought.that part of philosophy which deals with nature and the structure of reality. The fundamental nature of reality is outside language. Language splits things up into parts while the true nature of reality is undivided. Quality does not have to be defined. You understand it without definition, ahead of definition. Quality is a direct experience independent of and prior to intellectual abstractions. Positivism is a philosophy that emphasizes science as the only source of knowledge. It is an outgrowth of empiricism, the idea that all knowledge must come from experience, and is suspicious of any thought, even a scientific statement, that is incapable of being reduced to direct observation. A Value is Experience A value is experience. It is not a judgment about an experience. It is not a description of experience. The value itself is an experience. As such it is completely predictable. It is verifiable by anyone who cares to do so. Our culture has a blind spot here. Our culture teaches us to think it is the hot stove that directly causes the oaths. But not so! The value is between the stove and the oaths. Between the subject and the object lies the value. It is more real than the stove. American Indians are exceptionally skilled at holding to the everchanging center of things. That is the real reason they speak and act without ornamentation. It [metaphysics] has two kinds of opponents. The first are the philosophers of science, most particularly the group known as logical positivists, who say that only the natural sciences can legitimately investigate the nature of reality, and that metaphysics is simply a collection of unprovable assertions that are unnecessary to the scientific observation of reality. For a true understanding of reality, metaphysics is too mystical. ... The second group of opponents are the mystics. The term mystic is sometimes confused with occult or supernatural and with magic and witchcraft but in philosophy it has a different meaning. Some of the most honored philosophers in history have been mystics: Plotinus, Swedenborg, Loyola, Shankaracharya and many others. They share a common belief that the fundamental nature of reality is outside of language; that language splits things up into parts while the true nature of reality is undivided. Zen, which is a mystic religion, argues that the illusion of dividedness can be overcome by meditation. The Native American church argues that peyote can force- feed a mystic understanding that Indians had been deriving through Vision Quests in the past. This mysticism, Dusenberg thought, is the absolute center of traditional Indian life, and as Boas had made clear, it is absolutely outside of the domain of positivistic science and any anthropology that adheres to it. Historically mystics have claimed that for a true understanding of reality, metaphysics is too scientific. Metaphysics is not reality. Metaphysics is names about reality. Metaphysics is a restaurant where they give you a thirty-thousand page menu and no food. Phaedrus thought it portended very well for his Metaphysics of Quality that both mysticism and science reject metaphysics for completely opposite reasons. It suggested that if there is a bridge between the two, between the understanding of the Indians and the understanding of the anthropologists, metaphysics is where that bridge is located. Of the two kinds of hostility to metaphysics he considered the mystics hostility the more formidable. Mystics will tell you that once youve opened the door to metaphysics, you can say goodbye to any genuine understanding of reality. Thought is not a path to reality. It sets obstacles in that path because when you try to use thought to approach something that is prior to thought your thinking does not carry you towards that something. It carries you away from it. To define something is to subordinate it to a tangle of intellectual relationships. And when you do that you destroy real understanding. The central reality of mysticism, the reality that Phaedrus had called Quality in his first book, is not a metaphysical chess piece. Quality doesnt have to be defined. You understand it without definition, ahead of definition. Quality is a direct experience independent of and prior to intellectual abstraction. * * * END Enjoy Regards Ian 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/
