Andre, I assume you understand the point you are trying to make, but I do not get it.
Marsha On Mar 18, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Andre Broersen wrote: > Marsha to Andre: > > Bugger off! Do you understand the word paradox? > > Andre: > Are you by any chance trying to echo the way Mr. Pirsig dealt with the > mystic's objections to a Metaphysics of Quality Marsha? (Chapter 5, pp 67/8) > It seems to me that your comments are an attempt to reflect a dynamic > perspective? I also seem to remember that you, as Bodvar did, see Pirsig's > MOQ as Reality. In other words the MOQ IS experience, the MOQ IS Quality, the > MOQ IS Reality... . Is this the 'paradox' you are hinting at...that from your > perspective it is possible to 'ache'? > > You consider yourself a mystic Marsha? > > From this perspective it is impossible to be 'aching for the people in Japan' > since 'aching', 'people' and 'Japan' make no sense from a dynamic > perspective. The conjunctive relation 'for' also makes no sense from this > perspective since Quality is designated as 'the continuing flux', the > undifferentiated aesthetic continuum'. These aforementioned nouns and their > relations are static representations/ abstractions... you know, as posted on > this list before in terms of the 'ladle' and the 'water'. > > Sounds like you're quite impressed with this perspective Marsha, a > perspective within which you seem to feel quite comfortable. Reminds me of > the time I worked in psychiatry when a colleague (psychiatric nurse) told me > that, in one way, it was wonderful to be labeled insane... because the person > was never held responsible for their actions or verbalizations. No, it was > their 'insanity' talking and controlling...! > > Mr. Pirsig knows something about this state: > 'The only time he had been more manic about an abstract idea was when he had > first hit upon the idea of undefined Quality itself. The consequences of that > first mania had been disastrous, and so now, this time, he told himself just > to calm down and dig in. It was, for him, a great Dynamic breakthrough, but > if he wanted to hang on to it he had better do some static latching as > quickly and thoroughly as possible.(LILA, p 161) > > Sounds like very sound advice to me. After all we are here to talk about > Pirsig's MOQ which is a static intellectual pattern of value. No paradox of > any sort. Aching is a biological response to quality. > > Sticks and stones wont break my bones... (a la Tom Waits). ___ 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
