I would tend to agree with Joe. There is no fallacy in attributing experience at all levels. Such experience is unique and nontransferable. To use Ham's system, negation occurs at all levels of existence. I do not see anything wrong with this. In fact, from my point of view, it explains a lot. Conferring experience to all things is nothing new, the American Indians, that Pirsig has affinity for, had this view. This does not change the position of Quality imo. It still exists as levels. The intellectual level can be one such level. The only difference that I propose is that these levels are not hierarchical, but that they simply form. If one is looking for causality (or, why?) one can conjecture that there is a fundamental ground which results in these levels.
On a human level, separating the intellect from the rest of the body can indeed be seen as a level. It is a much simpler level requiring much organization. There is, however, not the distinct separation of intellect from the human experience as there is between the biological level and the body conscious level, imo. Mark On Nov 17, 2009, at 4:56:23 PM, "Joseph Maurer" <[email protected]> wrote: From: "Joseph Maurer" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [MD] MOQ and the Future: An Inquiry into Usefulness Date: November 17, 2009 4:56:23 PM PST To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> On 11/16/09 10:58 PM, "Ham Priday" <[email protected]> wrote: On Monday 16 November 2009 10:58 PM Ham writes: <snip> Pirsig had the opportunity to posit Quality as the primary source, thus affording a metaphysical foundation for his thesis. He chose Experience instead in deference to the positivists. As a consequence, MOQists must adapt to the notion that experience is indigenous to inanimate objects like rocks and atoms <snip> Hi Ham and all, In the face of undefined gravity it is not a huge leap of faith to analogize the experience of a rock falling, or atoms in fixed orbits. Essence on the other hand clouds the perceived reality by mistakenly denying motion in reality apart from itself. Imho Pirsig correctly identifies motion in the levels of evolution. Evolution is a simple, brilliant explanation for levels in existence. From that start it is relatively easy to comprehend the one and the many. Essence on the other hand is tied to divinity and is totally incomprehensible while resting on the shoulders of an author who proposes that evolution is not a change in existence, but simply independent nodules of essence. Joe > Pirsig had > the opportunity to posit Quality as the primary source, thus affording a > metaphysical foundation for his thesis. He chose Experience instead in > deference to the positivists. As a consequence, MOQists must adapt to the > notion that experience is indigenous to inanimate objects like rocks and > atoms 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/
