Hi Marsha --
I think claiming the tetralemma to be a poetic device may represent a
cultural bias rather than a fair assessment; likewise for some to dismiss
Buddhism because of the concept of 'reincarnation' or 'karma' is also
rather foolish.
It's hardly possible to accept all forms of Eastern mysticism, along with
Pirsig's MoQ, into one's personal philosophy. I get the impression that you
are an eclectic reader, picking up a story here, a koan there, and some
pretty prose somewhere else, with the hope of incorporating all these ideas
in your worldview. The net result is an ambiguity of beliefs which you
express when you quote the Tetralemma saying "the self both exists and does
not exist," or when you claim that everything is analogy. Even your basic
"understanding" of empirical reality is expressed as "static patterns of
value, ever-changing, conditionally co-dependent and impermanent ....that
pragmatically tend to persist and change within a stable, predictable
pattern." What conception of reality can you possibly draw from such
verbiage? One begins to wonder if anything is "real" in your life.
What you may be calling "conscious locus" I recognize as the
"silent witness" from meditating. I sometimes call it "awareness",
which seems a better term within the mindfulness experience.
This is why I find an attraction to some of your posts. I've often
wanted to ask if your Essentialism isn't more compatible with
Hindu philosophy with its Brahman and Atman.
Marsha, I haven't researched Hinduism or Buddhism for a long time, and I
tend to put their meditative rituals and aphorisms in a class with New Age
spiritualism, astrology, and belief in ghostly apparations. Unlike you, I
do not feel the need to align myself with an author simply because he/she
writes pleasant-sounding euphemisms. Philosophy is not an art form, and
some discrimination must be exercised when considering what an "authority"
wants you to believe.
The MDers can't even agree on what Pirsig means most of the time, so how can
we expect to embrace concepts that are foreign to the MoQ? As one who is
on "the other side" of this issue, I can appreciate the reluctance to
consider Essentialism as a valuistic philosophy on its own merits. This is
why I dislike having my concepts compared with the ideas of Plato,
Descartes, Nagarjuna, Dennett, or even Pirsig, for that matter, although
it's the price of admission here.
The quote from Anthony's Ph.D. thesis fits my perspective completely;
I have always felt the MoQ to be a bridge between West and East.
I suppose that's why I was immediately attracted to the ideas within
ZAMM. I had become frustrated with both Eastern and Western
philosophy, and RMP offered a perfect doorway to a better understanding
of both, and the telling was quite beautiful.
I understand where you're coming from, Marsha, and it's not much different
from the rest of us.
One can see the animus toward religion and theism in this forum, which I
suspect is a rebellion against being forced to attend church or chant
prayers as a child. Yet, it must be recognized that religion is a universal
answer to man's need for spiritual fulfillment. The dogma of religion is a
placebo for what cannot otherwise be satisfied -- the yearning for Truth
which is denied to man..
That's why we have to suffer through the dialectics of philosophy and the
confusion of incompatible thoughts: it's our only alternative..
My mother often quoted my Oma saying "We are too soon stupid,
and too late smart." - I have the deepest respect for you, and have
in the last few years felt more agreement with you than difference.
I chalk up some, though not all, of our differences to terminology.
Well, I think some of your adjectives are unnecessary, and proposing
a purpose is unprovable speculation. Regardless, I do not doubt for
one moment your sincerity or the value of your valuistic approach to this
list.
Well, thank you for this kindness, Marsha. I would like to believe I offer
something of value to this august body, and it's nice to be appreciated.
I'll have to modify my use of adjectives henceforth ... I didn't realize
they were getting in the way. As for life's "purpose", I never posit a a
final answer but only suggest what I believe is the most plausible one.
"Within itself the soul is free, innocent of all instrumentalities and
ideas." -- [Meister Eckhart]
Best,
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
