Matt, Steve, Steve said: Ironically, the direct (preconceptual)/indirect (conceptual) distinction that dmb is trying to use to push against us itself makes the so-called "out of touch with DQ" problem impossible or at least merely "secondary." If this problem is (as dmb must be saying) a problem with our concepts, it (and even the whole problem of SOM versus the MOQ) is merely a "secondary" problem.
Matt: Now, this is an interesting insight. It seems to scan, too: even SOM-philosophers are able to have direct experience despite their inability to conceptualize it (properly, we might say). This makes philosophy a kind of therapy (much like Wittgenstein envisioned), where one tries and get people to stop fussing with bad philosophical hang-ups. Ultimately, one might say (meaning "primarily"), it doesn't matter what philosophy one holds in terms of one's ability to tune into the direct experience of one's life. But if it _does_ get in the way, well--so says the therapeutic Pirsig--here's a way of not so getting hung up. Ron: Building on your course, the one of Philosophy as theraputic for bad philosphical hang ups, It illustrates that we use reason to justify our intuition. To me, the best philosophy embraces the general by way of meaning, to develop intuition. When intuition is made more intelligible (i.e. I 'know" myself better) reasons and belief become more stable, a feeling of "well-being" emerges and often this is what we know as "good". Better-ness is a natural feeling, one which drives through both pleasure and pain to-wards. It is our "intuition". If DQ is best understood theraputically, it is best understood in this way. In this way then it is why I believe it is best understood Philosophically in this way. Moving on this, theraputically, having and developing the ability to make primary distinctions concerning intuition are the most primary concerns of Philosophy the most primary concerns of wisdom. The most immediate and effective aspect being intelligibility. Accordingly the most primary, Pragmatic, general distinctions effect how all other distinctions are made.Thus intuitivly and theraputically, we seek to make the distinction between what we may act apon, influence and control in experience and what we may not act apon, influence and control . And when I say "experience" I mean to say the immediate flux of the now of "be-ing". Because Philosophy is theraputic it must always be put to use in the now of be-ing in this context. Theraputically, concering ourselves with what we may activly influence in experience relieves much of the hang-ups frustration and unhappiness in our lives. Needless to say, it is my reason and belief for the development of "well-being" and how it links to the idea of "following Dynamic Quality" and the development of a will that is free. .. ... 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
