Hi Andre, > Andre to Mary: > > > Is death subject or object? Is suffering subject or object? Is > sickness > > > subject or object? Is yin/ yang subject or object? Is form/ > > > formlessness subject or object??? > > > > Mary says:Yes. > > Andre: > Yes what? Commit yourself Mary! As dmb has argued in a previous post, > your SOM use is beyond its bounds. SOM postulates either this or that > Mind eternally separated from matter. Which one is it? We are talking > about clear divisions here. Mind or matter, material or mental, objects > or subjects, physical or psychological ...what else do you want? You > maintain the separation which the MOQ is unifying....yes! at the > intellectual level...this is its strength! The Good can be > intellectually defended! > [Mary Replies] The MoQ can be understood on many levels (with a small 'L'). The uncanny nature of Pirsig's work is how well it functions from so many perspectives. The things you speak of all have a relationship to the subject/object dichotomy. The MoQ has shown me (the only person I can speak for is myself, anyway) that all static patterns are illusion. To ask if they are subjects or objects is the wrong question, as I know you would agree. Our difference lies in where to place the MoQ and Eastern Mysticism in the "blessed 4-tiered hierarchy". I say, all levels are a response to Quality. That they have a hierarchy amongst themselves is only important in how they relate to themselves. BUT, they are all nothing more important than static (impermanent) patterns of value. So, if I say to you that I would put Eastern Mysticism in the Social Level, and the MoQ there too (if you or anyone should decide to treat it as a religion), then so what? I have committed no heresy. I have demoted nothing, for there is ultimately nothing to demote. The hierarchy between the levels is only that. It is not a hierarchy of Dynamic Quality. Dynamic Quality has no hierarchy. It just is. Do you see what I'm getting at? The MoQ has much greater strength and explanatory power when you view its arch enemy - SOM - at the top of the hierarchy. If you put the MoQ itself inside its own hierarchy, it becomes just another metaphysics, like James or any of the others DMB and Steve are endlessly debating.
Pirsig is a child of SOM as are we all. The MoQ was conceived (or discovered for those that see it that way) by a SOM intellect using SOM logic. His uncanny ability was to turn this SOM logic against itself! I really have reservations about anywhere you put the MoQ. If you put it in the Intellectual, it's just another theory. If you turn it into a Social religion, then I'd have to worship Dynamic Quality, I guess. Both kind of suck to my mind, and do it a disservice. This is why I lamented to Pirsig recently that I did not like it that he said "Good is a Noun". This smacks of QualiGod. They have Gods in the East too. Can't we move beyond that stuff? It just occurred to me that what I might be more comfortable with is "MoQ as a new kind of science". One that doesn't presume subjects and objects nor seek absolute answers. But that just occurred to me, and I need to think about it some more. > And if and when you say it is the subject/ object aggregate (as Bodvar > would have it) and if we understand by 'object' meaning inorganic and > organic patterns of value ( which in SOM are completely different > ideas > and postulates as opposed to be understood in the MOQ) and subjects are > social and intellectual patterns of value...then we may come a bit > closer... but to be understood not from a SOM perspective but from the > intellectual pattern called MOQ. > > [Mary Replies] Subjects are whatever is doing the talking, and objects are whatever they are talking about. Could be inorganic, could be an idea. Could be anything. Doesn't matter. It's all static patterns of value fighting it out in the static hierarchy. None of it's real. It's just one "response to Quality" fighting for position with another "response to Quality". Ho Hum. Best, Mary 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
