[Andre]:(quoting Pirsig)
'In the MOQ, nothing exists prior to the observation. The observation
creates the
patterns called 'observed' and 'observer'. Think about it. How could a
subject and object
exist in a world where there are no observations?' (Annotn 65).
-------------------------------
(Adrie.)
Nothing exists prior to...,
I think this is completely correct, its a form of hyperrealism to recognize
it, but the
formulation does not restrict realism and reality to the moq only.
The major implication is that there is no history and no future, only
dynamic quality,
direct expierience, the word flux is usefull.
What does common sense tells us,? There must be a history..!
well , no. It only looks that way, history itself passed away, exept for all
the recorded
instances, books, fossils,the recorded rememberance of Pearl Harbor,the
Zapruder film,
All written knowledge,...everything that left an imprint is dragged along
time, carried
to the present by us, ..we are carrying history to the present,and keep on
calling it
history.
But it became 'present' by observing 'it' ,using direct expierience again.
It becomes
present by our observing action.
The toughts of our brains? the patterns, the remembering of the past? they
are not
"history" or the 'past' , themselves, they are our concepts of the past.
History has left us,> static Fall-out Pirsig calls it.
The same goes for the future, what we think to know about the future, is a
concept, a
projection,it cannot be future itself, if it was 9/11 would have been
predicted,the murder
on Kennedy would have been predicted,The only future, is direct immidiate
expierience.
Think of this, take a handfull of sandgrains, and ask yourself, does it hold
an imprint
of the past, or does it contain a projection of the future?
direct expierience, nothing else.
Pragmatism is a form of hyperrealism
cheers Adrie
2010/10/27 Andre Broersen <[email protected]>
> Mark to Andre:
>
> If we are talking about the beginning in terms of universe creation (as the
> Word implies), then I have the following question: Does MOQ necessarily need
> a beginning to function. Are the same premises valid in a universe that has
> always existed and is changingf (the Static Universemodel)?
>
> Andre:
> Hi Mark. I'll give you a few MOQ ideas which may clarify:
>
> 'The MOQ holds that experience is the starting point'. (Annotn 31)
>
> 'In the MOQ, nothing exists prior to the observation. The observation
> creates the patterns called 'observed' and 'observer'. Think about it. How
> could a subject and object exist in a world where there are no
> observations'(Annotn 65)
>
> Notice here that Pirsig does not ask how there can be an observer without
> anything being observed (as Ham does)or ,for that matter how there can be
> anything thing to be observed without an observer (this would set up a
> contradiction in terms because it would beg the question).
>
> The MOQ starts with sentience and in this sense it would agree with
> Siddhartha Gautama be silent on 'beginnings'. The MOQ accepts the idea of a
> 'big bang' beginning. It accepts this as a high quality intellectual pattern
> of value but, of course is provisional.
>
> Mark:
>
> Secondly, there is personal experience and there is vicarious
> experience,and there is abstract experience, among others. Would a mystical
> experience be included in radical empiricism?
>
> Andre:
> Absolutely. If you read ZMM and LILA you'll find that the 'mystical'
> experience is responsible for Phaedrus abandoning his classic-romantic split
> of dividing Quality in favour of the more inclusive DQ/sq
> split.(LILA,pp112-9). This, by the way, has also had some significant
> implications for Phaedrus' ideas about the
> function/role/action/participation of the intellectual level
>
> I would suggest, but stand corrected, that radical empiricism and the
> Buddhist 'path to enlightenment' have very strong similarities. I haven't
> thought this through enough yet though, but maybe an interesting path to
> pursue.
>
> Mark:
>
> I wouldn't bring Buddhism in unless you know what you are talking
> about,that statement is misleading and open to all sorts of interpretations.
>
> Andre:
> I just did and am interested in hearing your views.
>
> Mark:
>
>
> Artificial would imply created by the mind, kind of like a constellation is
> artificial. It seems that radical empiricism can tend towards Scientific
> Materialism or Positivism. In your opinion, is this a correct
> interpretation? I can always learn.
>
> Andre:
> What I meant by forcing parts into a unity ( a One, an Absolute) is fine so
> long as the construction can be verified through experience. This is the
> touch stone of pragmatism and the rigorousness of radical empiricism. Claim
> anything you want but make it experimentally verifiable. This is the MOQ's
> test of truth, this is the MOQ's scientific approach. (and I do not need to
> remind you that the basis i.e.the fundamental reality out of which the MOQ
> emerged is indeed DQ/sq).
>
> Scientific materialism and Idealism have been united within the MOQ, each
> given their due, their place and their role and thus, withing the MOQ
> umbrella, their limitations.
>
> And I do want to emphasize here Mark that I am battling as hard as you are
> to get as much mileage out of the MOQ as Mr. Pirsig had intended. It is
> occupying a large part of my life. I do not know or understand all and
> everything. That is what we are here for on this discuss.
>
> I think I have a fair grasp on what it is not ( which is useful) but
> everyday something will pop up and will remind me of a word or sentence of
> either ZMM or LILA and connect these to moment-to-moment experiences of
> which our days consist, and illumine those parts least expected. And then
> revitalize oneself with gumption.
>
>
>
> 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
>
--
parser
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
