Marsha said to Ron:
.., I would have to say NO, I do not stand for any-thing. If you recognize
"me" standing for something, I would suspect you are recognizing social and
intellectual patterns we both share: patterns that attract and patterns that
repel. If you want me to admit an "intention," it would be to become
"unattached" to these patterns.
Ron replied:
Why fight being human, refine it dont deny it. if we are composed of value,
doesent it make more sense to develop those value than to try to escape them?
dmb says:
As Pirsig points out in a not yet published forward to Lila, the three main
characters are composed of different levels of value and that is why they do
not like each other or even understand each other. Lila is dominated by
biological values. Intellectually she is nowhere and socially - as a former
prostitute with mental health issues - she is about as far down the scale as
one can get. Rigel is dominated by social level values. He doesn't care if the
MOQ makes sense or not, he just knows it doesn't conform with his very
conventional ideas about what's moral. And then there is the intellectual
author. About the only thing that Lila and Rigel have in common is that they
both dislike his fancy book learning and feel put down or put off by it. And it
seems to me that Rigel has fewer options because intellectual values are off
the table for him and Lila is more or less reduced to basic survival and has
about as much freedom as a sophisticated animal.
I mean, enlightenment is not the same thing as regression, retardation,
reduction or the lack of growth. Peace of mind and suicide are two completely
different things. The lack of attachment is not the same thing as apathy or
nihilism or otherworldly, life-hating asceticism. The MOQ's ideas are supposed
to serve life, not deny or negate it.
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