On Apr 11, 2011, at 10:29 AM, Arlo Bensinger wrote:
> [Marsha had said]
> Me, you and Pirsig are a fiction.
>
> "This self-appointed little editor of reality is just an impossible fiction
> that collapses the moment one examines it. This Cartesian 'Me' is a software
> reality, not a hardware reality. This body on the left and this body on the
> right are running variations of the same program, the same 'Me,' which
> doesn't belong to either of them. The 'Me's' are simply a program format."
> (LILA)
>
> [Arlo asked]
> Okay. Is The MOQ a fiction as well? Should we take something more seriously
> if "The MOQ" says it, than if "Pirsig" says it?
>
> [Marsha]
> The MoQ is an intellectual static pattern of value. A very good one, a
> keeper. The inherently existing self does collapse on examination. While a
> collection of static patterns of value from all four levels, Mr. Pirsig is a
> very good collection, also a keeper.
>
> [Arlo]
> This doesn't answer my question. Are you suggesting that 'collections of
> static patterns' are 'fictions', but 'individual static patterns' are not?
>
> Also, I'm not sure what your point is. I had said "The MOQ doesn't say
> anything, Pirsig does", to which you replied "Pirsig is a fiction", as if to
> imply that this would be a difference to you between "The MOQ says" and
> "Pirsig says".
Marsha:
I am stating that individual or a collection, static patterns of value are
provisional truths and do not inherently exist. I interpret "fictionl" with
being provisional and not Ultimately real, both will collapse the moment one
examines them. As a metaphysical discussion group, it is the nature of reality
that I am trying to understand. Your choice between "The MoQ says" and "Pirsig
says" seems very pedantic.
> If I say, "The MOQ doesn't say anything, Pirsig does", and you reply with the
> sentiment "both the MOQ and Pirsig are fictions, as well as you and me",
> what's the point?
Marsha:
One is not more or less fictitious than the other. Do you think the MoQ, an
intellectual static pattern of value, is more real than Mr. Pirsig, a
collection of static patterns of value? If yes, how could that be if in either
case it is static quality?
> Okay, everything is a fiction. Does that mean we should stop speaking?
Marsha:
As if either of us could... ;-)
> Does that disagree with my point? Or is it just a call to stop talking and go
> meditate in a corner somewhere?
Marsha:
I do think a daily practice of mediation is very beneficial, essential even.
One does get to see how patterns do actually dance through ones head.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Personally I'm a negative empiricist and a radical skeptic, I'd always have
> to investigate for myself no matter what's been said by whom, whether God,
> President, Mr. Pirsig or the Beatles. So far, it has all ultimately come
> down to not this, not that.
>
___
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
