Hi Andre and Marsha, > > On Jun 7, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Andre Broersen wrote: > > > Mary to Andre (& Steve), > > > > It seeks to dominate the patterns valued by the level below. > > > > Andre: > > I prefer the use of 'dominate' and 'guide' when and where > appropriate, as Mr. Pirsig does. > > > > Mary: > > > > Once you have chosen to wield the analytical knife by dividing SQ > into > > subjects and objects your course is set and cannot be altered. > > > > Andre: > > In the MOQ subjects are social and intellectual patterns of value, > objects are inorganic and organic patterns of value. > > > > I do not quite follow what point you are trying to make. > > [Mary Replies] Yes, this is true as far as it goes, but what does it imply? Once you've accepted this premise, the next place it takes you is the me/not-me dichotomy. This is equally true and cannot be otherwise if you accept the first.
> > Mary: > > The MoQ is an intellectual idea. Spawned in the mind of a man as > steeped in > > SOM as any; > > > > Andre: > > I think you are suggesting that the MOQ is 'out of' SOM. You know > that I do not agree with this argument. > > > > Mary: > > but, as with all that is new, we must ask what it values and > > decide whether that agrees in value with the level from which it > sprang. > > > > Andre: > > I'll let Mr. Pirsig describe the 'process': > > 'At first the truths Phaedrus began to pursue were lateral truths;no > longer the frontal truths of science, those toward which the discipline > pointed, but the kind of truth you see laterally, out of the corner of > your eye...you start looking laterally. That's a word he later used to > describe a growth of knowledge that doesn't move like an arrow in > flight, but expands sideways, like an arrow enlarging in > flight...Lateral knowledge is knowledge that's from a wholly unexpected > direction, ...Lateral truths point to the falseness of axioms and > postulates underlying one's existing system of getting at truth. To all > appearances he was just drifting...Drifting is what one does when > looking at lateral truth. He couldn't follow any known method of > procedure to uncover its cause because it was these methods and > procedures that were screwed up in the first place. So he drifted'. > (ZMM) > > > > Mary: > > I would suggest that the MoQ is a new idea that would defeat SOM and > take > > off on purposes of its own. > > > > Andre: > > And I suggest that the MOQ is Mr. Pirsig's 'root expansion of > rationality'. That which he set out to do in ZMM and finished in LILA. > ZMM is about DQ (if you like) and LILA is about SQ. > > [Mary Replies] The most significant statement in the above quote is this, "...Lateral truths point to the falseness of axioms and postulates underlying one's existing system of getting at truth." > > And what does it(i.e this intellectual pattern called MOQ)value? It > values Truth as a species of Good. > [Mary Replies] I hope, by that, you do not mean what it appears to mean on the surface. That is, I sincerely hope you cannot define your terms. > > > Andre, > > In the James quote is truth capitalized because it comes at the > beginning of a sentence or because it represents an absolute truth? > > I consider static patterns of value to be truths, truths that are ever- > changing, relative and impermanent. > [Mary Replies] An excellent question, Marsha! Best to you both, 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
