On 21 Nov 2009 at 16:16, Andre Broersen wrote: > Platt to Andre: > What I meant by transconceptual is knowledge beyond definition, > beyond words, "undifferentiated without conceptual distinctions." It refers > to our meta-sense, a higher form of understanding that recognizes the > beauty of the Parthenon and the truth of Godel's Theorem, a tuning fork > in the brain than hums when we stumble upon something of > exceptionally high quality -- like the MOQ. > > Andre: > Thanks for this Platt. Is this 'knowledge beyond definition' > similar/the same as our intuitive 'sense' (of the > aesthetic/harmony/beauty/Quality) or for that matter, non-algorithmic > understanding?
Hey Andre, Sounds right to me. But in the Copleston papers Pirsig had this cautionary note about "intuition." "Intuition sometimes is an equivalent of Dynamic Quality. However, it also a kind of biological instinct. Since Western philosophy confuses these two, the MOQ avoids the term." I think what you and I describe could also be termed "mystic understanding." Regards, Platt > > Cheers > 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/ 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/
