Marsha to Andre:
Yes, I'm saying that to suggest Eastern Philosophy is something special,
outside of logic and the scientific method (SOM), and therefore disproves
Bo's claim is false. Buddhism does not represent some strange kind of
non-s/o intellectual patterns.
Andre:
In the MoQ direct, pure experience (Quality) is undivided. Any intellectual
distinctions logically come after (as Pirsig points out).Thus it appears to me
as simple common sense that experience comes to us in S/O form. The static
organization and explanations follow usually the (Western) postulated/
theoretical 'object'(inorganic/organic) and , again, the postulated/
theoretical 'subject' or 'self'
(social/intellectual).
Perhaps you may appreciate that the conclusions, even justifications and
subsequent empirical and pragmatic implications will be quite different from an
'Eastern' perspective as compared to a 'Western' perspective ( please allow for
the simplification/generalization.)
I think this is what Phaedrus meant by his qualification/rectification
of Descartes' statement as compared to the same statement being made by
a Chinese philosopher.
As I understand it, the SOL is postulating the dominance of the
'objective' over the 'subjective' ( or the other way around!) and this
is what I find objectionable. I also find its 'remedy' i.e. a 'truly'
MoQ perspective (DQ/SQ) not needing another level. I believe the
'Eastern' perspective and the 'Western' perspective can be reconciled
(and I believe they are)in the MOQ. They are reconciled in the DQ/SQ
configuration and, again, I think that the SOL as intellect only
clouds/obscures the issue.
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
