Folks at home and abroad.
I don't know where to butt in, but something must be noted in the
debate about academy, philosophology and intellectualism to prevent it
from turning into SOM's - i.e. intellect's - internal "reactionary vs
progressive" debate where Platt is demonized and his antagonists
makes heroes of themselves. I side with Platt because it's more than
plain that he is on MOQ's side in the sense that the original Quality
Idea was intended to be an attack on the "ghost of rationality" (the
camp-fire talk in ZAMM) Later it developed into an attack on
"academy", it's implied by the philosophy course in Chicago that
Aristotle & Co were the foundations of the objective-over-subjective
aproach, However, at that stage this was like thinking trying to abolish
thinking and he lost his mind
But as the Quality Idea develops it shows that rationality isn't thinking
itself rather the very subject/object kind that replaced an older Aretê
thinking. And from the tentative Quality Metaphysics in ZAMM it's plain
that he meant it (the MOQ) to be a still higher turn of the "thinking
screw" and, further, in this new system the former system (SOM) was
meant to be the INTELLECTUAL part (it's there in plain words). And in
the final MOQ it's also clear that the intellectual level must continue to
be the subject/object distinction for all puzzle pieces to fall into their
places. The fact that this interpretation pops up all over the place is the
best proof (remember Mary's many quotes).
But now the clue: The "intellect" that Platt (backed by Pirsig) accuses
of creating social nightmares isn't really MOQ's highest static level of
good, but SOM before its Q-role is revealed - or the intellectual level
resenting its new and humble role and strives to regain its former glory
- and this is the bend we are in. Once the MOQ is realized (i.e. the "M"
is removed from SOM) intellect's S/O turns into the highest static
quality that has brought us all the good intellectual patterns listed in
LILA. No longer can it do more than its assigned role (to prevent social
value from doing more than ITS role is ...etc downwards) but - alas -
the MOQ is not realized and our pundits works overtime to prevent the
MOQ from getting out of intellect's grip from where it can CHECK
INTELLECT. Inside intellect it will be assimilated by its S/O and it's
back to square one.
And square one is the "Quality/MOQ" meta-metaphysics that the
pundits cling to and, yes, Pirsig has said enough to give them
ammunition. However this
"Remember that the central reality of the MOQ is not an object
or a subject or anything else. It is understood by direct
experience only and NOT BE REASONING OF ANY
KIND.(LC, Note 132 - emphasis added)
...makes nil and void of the "Quality/MOQ" atrocity by showing that the
DQ/SQ is the only Q-arrangement possible, besides Pirsig has said
that Quality is MOQ's DQ. Just ask Anthony.
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/md/archives.html
