Hi Mati, Mati, If there was one criticism of Bo approach which I agree on it is Pirsig ain't presently buying into what Bo is proposing, then again he hasn't endorsed much on the idea of intellect that has pushed this discussion ahead.
Khoo: Pirsig has stated his points with respect to intellect and there is much that can be built from these if we draw from alternative/other sources including and especially Eastern Philosophy. It is interesting how some can buy into Bo's warped view of history and his entirely corrupted perception of the intelligence-intellect-intellectual level development continuum. With all due respect Mati, it is a lot more sophisticated than that but Bo's superficial view is not helping us understand this process better. This is compounded by Bo's need to explain away the so-called container logic contradiction, even none arises when we differentiate between the MOQ as an intellectual pattern and Quality itself as Reality. Its more than a gumption trap for Bo. He defined himself out of an understanding of Quality itself. Mati: > Pirsig is the only one that can speak directly to > that. That being said so much of Pirsig work in both ZMM and Lila in > my understanding gives a credence to what Bo is arguing, that path of > intellect as a static pattern is the path forged by the S/O divide. > Khoo: What if you did not have Pirsig to turn to? How would you work it out ? The main thrust of Pirsig's theses in both ZAMM and Lila is the deficiency of SOM-dominated Western civilisation. He frames the attack in that direction because its the 800 pound gorrilla in the room no one can ignore. But in various places he lays the ground work of SOM as being only one of alternative intellectual patterns possible, not the only ONE that would constitute the intellectual level. Mati: No other Metaphysical consideration can match it. I have repeatedly asked for a metaphysical premise that historically match what s/o divide has done. If this is one I would have suspect it would have been thrown on the table by now. Heck if there was, I couldn't understand why Pirisg wouldn't have eluded to it by now. The fact is the only metaphysical paradigm that Pirsig addresses in both ZMM and Lila is SOM. Khoo: I understand your difficulty with this one and for a long while I wondered whether it was a cultural blindspot. But heck no, I decided that for those who took the trouble to be on this list, their curiosity must be a result of their search for an alternative Metaphysics as defining as SOM has been for Western civilisation. If you look at the development of Western SOM, what the Greeks initially developed as a set of intellectual patterns actually went to sleep for a millenia. No one even spoke Greek for a long long while. Its resurgence in the Cartesian era is a relatively short span in human civilisation and it is relatively easy to fall into the trap that the development of SOM/scientifc materialism and its dominance in Western civiliation is the only viable and valid way for the evolution of a society. Other intellectual patterns/metaphysically premises have been recessive in the Western mindset and did not appear to be valid contenders to "run a society with". Mati: I know that some believe that by accepting this premise that it dismisses much of the Eastern philosophies that seems valued by so many. Yes Eastern philosophies have an intellectual capacity, but they are not static intellect pattern that delivered use from the social level. It may be an issue of semantics, but I clearly see what Bo has said for years and humbly endorse it until I can understand otherwise. Khoo: As I have said above, the Western SOM-bias tends to compare the "material fruits" of the sucess of Western civilisation with the so-called non-development of the Eastern civilisations and to conclude that Eastern philosophies therefore do not count with respect to a full-fledged intellectual level. An intellectual level, a category of intellectual patterns of value that have the capacity to direct the course of society's evolution, has to be defined from that society's own set of values. Are you saying that the only pathway for a society's development is the scientific material course ? If you take that route, you are arguing for a solely SOM dominated development which smacks everything of a Western bias. Pirsig's whole thesis in ZAMM and Lila is that taken to extremes there is a terrible price to be paid by an individual in a cold heartless, amoral society. Mati: The way I see it is that Eastern thought has it's contribution but not as as the static latch that s/o divide offered in terms of intellect. Historically and philosophically speaking I can't see it and I have tried, believe me I have tried. Khoo: Now as a counterpoint to the Western SOM-bias that it is the only metaphysical system available, period, I want to say that very little serious work has been done on studying the older cultures/civilisations of the East and even the pre-colonial Americas to say that substantive alternative intellectual levels did not exist. The correct MOQ position is to allow for these possiblities, even if Pirsig himself may not mention it explicitly. The robustness of the MOQ rests on its applicability to all cultures and civilisations and in my own view, its importance to Eastern civilisations is the ability to meet with and to temper the effects of the invasion of SOM into Eastern countries and societies, notwithstanding the examples of some East Asian countries have already successfully accomodated this. Again there is very little study done on this front. Mati, I will offer to you an alternative non-SOM metaphysical premise that has dominated Chinese society and developed a whole intellectual level which has guided its social development, including the fields of science and medicine. I won't go into detail here but highlight briefly the Chinese Metaphysics of Harmony of Polar Opposites much more familar expressed as Yin-Yang : "The created universe carries the *yin* at its back and the *yang * in front; Through the union of the pervading principles it reaches harmony. (Lao tzu, Tao-te ching)" The first slice of this Reality is not subject object but opposing forces or energies, in Chinese terminology, regarded as light or dark, hot and cold, masculine or feminine. Of course its worldview is that the universe is in dynamic change or flux, in perpetual motion as a result of diametrically opposing forces. Reality is seen in the context of the rising and the waning. The idea of opposites (Yin Yang, the union and harmony of opposites) has actually existed in both Eastern and Western philosophy, but not accounted for seriously, except in Chinese society, and in Pirsigian terms, as static a latch as any. For Heraclitus, for instance, a perceived object is a harmony between two fundamental units of change, a waxing and a waning. Our old friend Plato thought otherwise: one experienced unit is a state, or object existing, which can be observed. Change is to be deduced by comparing observations, but no matter how many of those you are able to make, you cannot get through the mysterious gap between them to account for the change that must be occurring there. One philosopher first slices Reality this way, another slices It another way. Two separate intellectual patterns emerge from way back when. One grows to dominate Western civilisation, the other grows to dominate Eastern/Chinese civilisation. Its the view of a number of Chinese intellectuals in China and the diaspora, that as a whole, the Chinese tradition provides a pragmatic avenue for problem solution or conflict resolution in this scientific-technologicalera. This tradition is essentially concretion/ process/ humanity/community-oriented which can complement and can be complemented by the Western philosophic tradition which is essentially abstraction / substance/ objects/individuals-oriented. Best regards Khoo Hock Aun 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/
