John said:
That's the problem with Quality in an academic matrix, and it's not a problem
with Quality, it's a problem with the academic matrix.
Arlo replied:
I think you are conflating Quality with the MOQ. Certainly, one cannot (nor
should try) to constrain "Quality in an academic matrix". ...you seem to be
using the MOQ as a placeholder for the Quality-in-Living view as described in
ZMM. ...But the MOQ IS an intellectual pattern, and as such is about "expanding
rationality", which is an intellectual endeavor, one that is best served by the
"academic" discourse of people like you, Ant, Granger, DMB, Matt, Steve and
others. ... The MOQ is about an expanded rationality for reinterpreting
experience, an intellectual endeavor.
dmb says:
Right. Dynamic Quality itself is different from The Metaphysics of Quality. As
G. William Barnard might put it, we tell truths and touch realities. We defend
our conceptualizations on paper but the primary living experience is felt and
known by direct acquaintance. In that sense, DQ is not just outside the
textbooks and classrooms. It's prior to words and concepts of any kind. But,
like Arlo says, the MOQ is conceptual and verbal. As Pirsig says, it has to be
or there isn't any metaphysics. There isn't any philosophy of any kind without
words and concepts, including the MOQ.
The trick is, the MOQ is build around DQ despite the fact that the word and the
concept refers to the pre-verbal and the pre-conceptual. And including DQ is
exactly what the expansion of rationality is all about. This is very important
to understand, MOQers. This is the key to understand what it means to say that
truth is a species of the Good. This is the key to understanding why the
intellectual level is not the same thing as subject-object metaphysics.
"He felt that the solution started with a new philosophy, or he was it as even
broader than that - a new spiritual rationality - in which the ugliness and the
loneliness and the spiritual blankness of dualistic technological reason would
become illogical. Reason was no longer to be 'value free.' Reason was to be
subordinate, logically, to Quality, and he was sure he would find the cause of
its not being so back among the ancient Greeks, whose mythos had endowed our
culture with the tendency to do what is 'reasonable' even when it isn't any
good. That was the root of the whole thing. Right there. I said a long time ago
that he was in pursuit of the ghost of reason. This is what I meant. Reason and
Quality had become separated and in conflict with each other and Quality had
been forced under and reason made supreme somewhere back then." (ZAMM 358)
"In the past our common universe of reason has been in the process of escaping,
rejecting the romantic, irrational world of prehistoric man. It's been
necessary since before the time of Socrates to reject the passions, the
emotions, in order to free the rational mind for an understanding of nature's
order which was as yet unknown. Now it's time to further an understanding of
nature's order by reassimilating those passions which were originally fled
from. The passions, the emotions, the affective domain of man's consciousness,
are a part of nature's order too. The central part. ...We have artists with no
scientific knowledge and scientists with no artistic knowledge and both with no
spiritual sense of gravity at all, and the result is not just bad, it is
ghastly. The time for real reunification of art and technology is really long
overdue. (ZAMM 294)
"But to tear down a factory or to revolt against a government or to avoid
repair of a motorcycle because it is a system is to attack effects rather than
causes; and as long as the attack is upon effects only, no change is possible.
The true system, the real system, is our present construction of systematic
thought itself, rationality itself, and if a factory is torn down but the
rationality which produced it is left standing, then that rationality will
simply produce another factory. If a revolution destroys a systematic
government, but the systematic patterns of thought that produced that
government are left intact, then those patterns will repeat themselves in the
succeeding government. There's so much talk about the system. And so little
understanding."
"Our current modes of rationality are not moving society forward into a better
world. They are taking it further and further from that better world. Since the
Renaissance these modes have worked. As long as the need for food, clothing and
shelter is dominant they will continue to work. But now that for huge masses of
people these needs no longer overwhelm everything else, the whole structure of
reason, handed down to us from ancient times, is no longer adequate. It begins
to be seen for what it really is...emotionally hollow, esthetically meaningless
and spiritually empty."
"We're living in topsy-turvy times, and I think that what causes the
topsy-turvy feeling is inadequacy of old forms of thought to deal with new
experiences. I've heard it said that the only real learning results from
hang-ups, where instead of expanding the branches of what you already know, you
have to stop and drift laterally for a while until you come across something
that allows you to expand the roots of what you already know. Everyone's
familiar with that. I think the same thing occurs with whole civilizations when
expansion's needed at the roots."
"Now I want to show that that classic pattern of rationality can be
tremendously improved, expanded and made far more effective through the formal
recognition of Quality in its operation."
"It's long past time to take a closer look at this qualitative preselection of
facts which has seemed so scrupulously ignored by those who make so much of
these facts after they are "observed." I think that it will be found that a
formal acknowledgment of the role of Quality in the scientific process doesn't
destroy the empirical vision at all. It expands it, strengthens it and brings
it far closer to actual scientific practice."
"I think the basic fault that underlies the problem of stuckness is traditional
rationality's insistence upon "objectivity," a doctrine that there is a divided
reality of subject and object. For true science to take place these must be
rigidly separate from each other." "When traditional rationality divides the
world into subjects and objects it shuts out Quality, and when you're really
stuck it's Quality, not any subjects or objects, that tells you where you ought
to go."
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4
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
