[Platt] Obviously you feel good about what makes sense. So do I, especially when I became convinced that Pirsig made a great deal of sense when he wrote: The Metaphysics of Quality would show how things become enormously more coherent-fabulously more coherent-when you start with an assumption that Quality is the primary empirical reality of the world." (Lila, 5)
[Krimel] Emotions are primary. This is true ontogenetically and phylogenetically. It is hard to image who could possibly think otherwise. But the fact that emotions come first does not make them either more reliable or more practical. Reason is an evolutionary enhancement. [dmb quotes Pirsig] 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. (ZAMM p. 294) dmb says: Like the classic-romantic split or the static-dynamic distinction, the idea is to include them both. The idea is to integrate reason and the affective domain to produce an expanded and improved form of rationality. [Krimel] Who has disputed this? [dmb] The classification of static quality into levels helps us see that Pirsig is not simply saying we should we become hedonists or live on our instincts. [Krimel] The classification of static quality is always an somewhat arbitrary process. Pirsig's levels in this case are no exception. Classifying static patterns is what Eddington dismissed as "stamp collecting." [dmb] You know why he's calling the affective domain of man's consciousness "the central part" or nature's order? He's talking about Quality. The "passions" also include the creative spirit, the ability to form a hypothesis, to hit your target on the fly, and all those other forms of skilled engagement. In those situations the "emotions" are not just things like sadness and anger. It's far more subtle and complex but it certainly involves the use of "feelings" as real information. [Krimel] The passions also include anger, greed, lust, hate, and fear. Those affective domains are the central part of the natural order and reason is a new part of the natural order that helps us escape from the dictates of that older "natural order". Reason and emotion do work together. More often than not emotions are "reasonable" and reason serves our emotions. How could it be otherwise? [dmb] Or, to be perfectly blunt about it, you're just advocating squareness. The lifeless voice of that bloodless, heartless reason is the main enemy of the MOQ and it's coming out of your mouth. When you read Moby Dick, I'll bet you cheered for the whale. [Krimel] Reason ought to tell us that there is a time and place for emotions. But in the years I have spent reading your posts I can see why you must think that reason is the main enemy of the MoQ. It really shows in your writing. 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
