Steve, Andre, Mark, and all Value enthusiasts --
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:14 AM, Andre Broersen <andrebroer...@gmail.com>
wrote to Steve:
Pirsig's response to Bodvar: "This is a subtle slip back into
subject-object
thinking. Values have bee converted to a kind of object in this sentence,
and then the question is asked, "If values are an object,then where is the
subject?" The answer is found in the MOQ sentence,"It is not Lila who has
values, it is values that have Lila."Both the subject and the object are
patterns of value."( Annotn 76).
Rather than making values or Lila an "object", why not consider the fact
that Value is also a verb? We _value_ things, people, and ideas. As a
verb, Value means "to rate or scale in usefulness, importance, or general
worth." But that's a dead dictionary definition. Perhaps this short story
will bring it to life for you.
"Yesterday evening, while at a friend's house drinking and playing cards, I
was accosted (which might be a strong word) by his slightly drunk roommate,
who demanded to know what my values and beliefs were. "Summarize them in one
word," this fellow ordered.
"If I'd been more sober, I could have nipped the whole confusion in the bud,
since its source had been evident from the very first question.
"Summarize your values and beliefs in one word," he demanded.
"And, after scoffing at the very notion, I said (a bit flippantly but with
as much sincerity as a one-word answer to such a question can contain, when
one is already drunk): "Love."
"Okay, two words," he said, "What do you mean, 'love'? What, like 'spread
love'?"
"Do you see what just happened? Do you see what he did just then? Love is
already a verb. Why should we have to tack on another? Well, probably
because he assumed love was a noun, a thing, a goal or an end, and not a
process.
"But love is a process. It is a verb. And furthermore, it is a process of
the self, something that the individual does and must choose, freely, to do.
What are my values, what do I believe in, how do I live my life? Love I
love.
"When we change our value from 'loving' to 'spreading love,' what happens?
We shift our focus from what we ourselves are doing and thinking (e.g. our
own attitudes, behaviors and ideas), to what others are doing and how we
want them to behave, think and feel. How far am I willing to go to 'spread
love'"? Am I willing to 'get rid of' people who I deem less than loving so
that they don't 'spread' their lack of love? Which is more important--that
I live according to my own values, or that I am effective in making everyone
else live by them?
"The difference is that my values are my values, or more accurately, that I
value (v.) certain things regardless of their prominence or dominance for
others, and holding these things as valuable does not hinge on whether or
not anyone else in the world holds them to be so."
-- [abridged from
http://meadowsweet-myrrh.blogspot.com/2008/07/value-is-verb.html]
My point here is simply that we love or desire what we value. The
"proximate object" of our attraction may be a piece of music, a rustic
scene, a beloved person, or a metaphysical concept of the universe on which
our focus is fixed. But what produces this attraction is neither the
noumenon nor the phenomenon, not "me" or "other", but the fact that the
conscious Self is separated from the Source of its being. That source is
experientially represented by the object of our awareness. But the
phenomenon is only an "appearance" presented to us; it is not our being but
the being of something from which we are conditionally estranged --
something we fervently seek for ourselves.
This is how I understand Value. It isn't a realm of the universe constantly
moving towards "betterness". It isn't a hormonal change in our biological
state called "emotion". Value is the affinity of the sensible Self for the
wholeness of Essence which created it. It is our inextricable bond with the
essential Source that both divides and connects us in the Self/Other
dichotomy of existence.
Does this self-activated concept of Value resonate with any of you? Do we
really need a hierarchy of levels and patterns to appreciate what links us
to the essential Source of our finite being? I'd be interested to know what
you think.
Valuistically speaking,
Ham
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
