Marsha, Andre, All 24 Nov. Marsha said:
> What is the M in MoQ and SOM represent? 't it represent a formal > model of reality? Most people do not have an acknowledged > metaphysics. Philosophers of varying stripes look for a model of > reality, but the model is quite separate from the experience. So > when I talk about the MoQ it is as a model. So when you suggest we > are 'bathing in Quality', that's a poetic description of the > experience, and I quite agree with it as a poetic description. I agree with " ... most people do not have an acknowledged metaphysics". This is what Pirsig meant by "..no one can avoid metaphysics" They live inside a system so huge that no one knows it (the fish and sea metaphor) more like ancient people were Q-socialists and modern people are "Q-intellectuals" (SOM-ists) without knowing it. In this context each level can be regarded a metaphysics in a most extended context. You also correctly say "...Philosophers of varying stripes ...etc" Because philosophy emerged as part and parcel of SOM (or intellect) it is automatically regarded a model of reality, or if called "metaphysics" regarded as the Aristotelian kind which is the same "model". But then you speak about the MOQ as a model too. I'm more with Andre here, according to the level-as-metaphysics assertion, the reason that the Aretê epoch (the era when social value ruled) looked so tempting to Phaedrus was that it was before the subject/object (model/reality) divide. And the MOQ's very objective is to return to a holistic existence on a higher level (of the spiral). And now I want to introduce the Newton Gravity talk again because it contains the first outline of Phaedrus' quest. You all know how it goes, P's claim is that things falling to the ground was dynamic and did not "stabilize" as gravitation until Newton, i.e. gravity was created by Newton!! Not as an explanation of something - this is SOM and looks obvious in its hindsight - but as a new "gravity reality". Phaedrus' original task was of returning to a pre-SOM metaphysics which is no no "model", but reality itself in the old Aretê sense. Andre called it "living the MOQ" which is right but he spoils it by the notion that "living" means "not thinking"). However this grand task became messed up, not only in LILA, but by the ZAMM's author who starts with a SOM diagrams with a "reality" on top, which is error #1. SOM has one subjective and one objective reality. Full stop! The next error is of placing a "Quality Reality" on top which he gives the impression of being split by the MOQ into one dynamic and one static part, which it isn't,.the true MOQ has a Dynamic Quality that has spawned static Quality levels. Had he presented it this way it would have been good - the MOQ would have been a new "healed" reality - but Pirsig had become same relentless "mechanic" that he accused Aristotle of being who and splitted and splitted. The MOQ is no fifth level, but the Quality Reality it was meant to be. End of Chautauqua Bodvar 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/
