Platt, Horse, All. Right you are Platt. It's too much swishing of old tea (philosophology) around this place. But the reluctance to clean out the cup and fill it with the fresh Quality stuff is that the SOL lurks at every other page (leaf). For instance your often cited "social nightmare created by intellect", its more than plain that the 4th. level must be SOM for it to cause this condition. "Manipulation of symbols" can by no conceivable means undermine social value. Other "refusals to look through the telescope" is the chief philosophologist Matt Kundert who - when I pointed to his essay leading to the SOL - delivered an exasperated disclaimer.
For Horse. The way Pirsig starts his new metaphysics it's clear that he intended the term in a wider sense that the academical "...metaphysics as part of the body of philosophical works", more of a new (meta-) level of existence, but Pirsig squandered his grand opening by pulling in his claws and starting a trite slandering of the MOQ as another theory ... now about Quality, but the Reality=Quality means nothing until the DQ/SQ-divide. As long as the MOQ is "seen within the body of academia" it's caught inside its gravity field without reaching escape velocity. Bodvar Horse > > As metaphysics is part of the body of philosphical works and needs > > to be seen within that body we also discuss other philosophers > > work and other philosophical areas mainly in relation to Pirsig > > and the Metaphysics of Quality. Sometimes it can get technical and > > some on this list don't seem able to keep up with that so rather > > than just get on with their own ideas they complain about others > > because they either don't understand it or it doesn't happen to > > fit in with their views! Crazy but true :) Platt: > Lest someone get the wrong impression it's well to remember that > Pirsig railed against what he called "philosophology," described as > "a sometimes parasitic growth that likes to think it controls its > host by analyzing and intellectualizing its host's behavior." (Lila, > 26)) There's lots of that sort of parasitic twaddle going on here > rather than what Pirsig hoped for from this site, namely, Dynamic > creative philosophy (such as Bo exemplifies) instead of the > "mind-numbing scholarly precision" of academic philosophers. What > Pirsig wanted us to avoid is well described in the following analogy > from Chap. 2 of Lila: > > "There's an old analogy to a cup of tea. If you want to drink new > tea you have to get rid of the old tea that's in your cup, otherwise > your cup just overflows and you get a wet mess. Your head is like > that cup. It has a limited capacity and if you want to learn > something about the world you should keep your head empty in order > to learn it. It's very easy to spend your whole life swishing old > tea around in your cup thinking it's great stuff because you've > never really tried anything new, because you could never get it in, > because the old stuff prevented its entry because you were so sure > the old stuff was so good, because you never really tried anything > new . . . on and on in an endless circular pattern." > > Lots of old tea being swished around here by those who still think > it's great stuff, whether it be from James, Rorty or the Beatles. > Hopefully new blood will bring new ideas. > > Regards, > Platt > > > > > > > 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/md/archives.html > > ------- End of forwarded message ------- 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/md/archives.html
