Hi, Joseph Maurer -
It seems to me the purpose of rhetoric is to put perceptions into words.
Given that ZAMM comes to a defense of the rhetorikos, what does this say
about Bob as a philosopher? I wonder if there are any post-modern takes on
ZAMM/Lila? I certainly feel a very artful (in the best sense) framing of the
MOQ in those books ... the fact that it's in a setting, and so
personally-nakedly, that we're shown with great vividness and care how the
MOQ arose, in those books - this is very significant. To paraphrase a
reviewer (and applying to a very dissimilar book), the parallels to "Atlas
Shrugged" are patent.
But In giving us the analog, unsuspected background from/in which the MOQ
arose - are we not being given something very nourishing? Both as admirers
of the MOQ and as persons? Bob is so much more organic and whole, as a
literary artist, than the Post-Moderns or Rand. I 've been rereading
"Atlas," and while enjoying some of it very much, it’s so steely and in
places so disjointed/constructed. It's a pure emanation of the personality
of the author, in all its varied light and dark. In MOQ terms, she tries to
strictly discipline and control DQ by reducing it to inescapable,
everlasting SQ structures in the mind. Yet she really wants to inspire, at
points.
Here's another parallel with Rand (specifically, some of the schisms around
her): does the MOQ admit of development and extension? If one worked out an
implication, and Bob were not around to weigh in, if so he chose - would
that become part of the MOQ, or is the MOQ locked down only to what he
himself authorized? Would his dharma heir, in time, be able to authorize an
extension?
The process of creating and using words is a learned process of moving
from an emotional apprehension of DQ perceptions which is an individual
emotional activity to a conceptual intellectual activity.
That's part of it. But words have an evolutionary-psychological component,
arising out of tribal signaling. Now they know bird have "names" in their
songs. The computational/intellect part is terribly important - one reason I
love Rand for pointing out how important it is for our very existence, right
here - but that's not all.
If done well rhetoric would trigger an indefinable emotional response in
another which he then would express in his own words indicating how his
response followed the source for his actions even if the words were not
the same.
Yes! It's very emotionally rich being a human, or can be, and good
art/rhetoric can help awaken us to this. I'm not politically left, but once
when I was in London I heard Tony Blair speaking, and I found him so
impressive I exclaimed, "With a guy like that, I could go Labour!"
MRB
http://www.fuguewriter.com
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
