Chaos is a conceptually constructed idea, it is not DQ. - Marsha
On Mar 10, 2012, at 2:51 PM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote: > dmb, > Yes, these things come to one "as awareness". They are then presented > in the form of rhetoric which requires the use of words. The words > are secondary; it is what they are presenting which is important. > Once we dogmatically stick to the need for a certain word, we are > stuck. No 'betterness" can proceed from that, imo. MoQ implies > freedom as I see it. Let us not be bound by particular words. > Otherwise we only exist in static quality, like a computer. > > Clinging to DQ is presented in an objective way. It is chaos, because > there is no thing to cling to. DQ is not Some Thing. Chaos implies > that any static understanding (sq) is completely demolished. This is > what happened to Pirsig requiring serious treatment, in my humble > opinion. Chaos means nothing to tie one's thoughts to. Believe me, > it is chaotic. > > Cheers, > Mark > > On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 9:31 AM, david buchanan <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> From chapter 9 of LILA: >> "...Since this whole metaphysics had started with an attempt to explain >> Indian mysticism Phaedrus finally abandoned his classic-romantic split as a >> choice for a primary division of the MOQ. The division he finally settled on >> was one he didn't really choose in any deliberate way. It was more as if it >> chose him. He'd been reading Ruth Benedict's Patterns of Culture without any >> particular search in mind, when a relatively minor anecdote stopped him. It >> stayed with him for weeks. He couldn't get it out of his mind. The >> anecdote was a case-history in which there was a conflict of morality. It >> concerned a Pueblo Indian who lived in Zuni, New Mexico, in the nineteenth >> century. Like a Zen koan (which also originally meant 'case-history') the >> anecdote didn't have any single right answer but rather a number of possible >> meanings that kept drawing Phaedrus deeper and deeper into the moral >> situation that was involved.” >> >> From the Wikipedia article on Ruth Benedict: >> "Benedict's 'Patterns of Culture' (1934) was translated into fourteen >> languages and was published in many editions as standard reading for >> anthropology courses in American universities for years.The essential idea >> in Patterns of Culture is, according to the foreword by Margaret Mead, "her >> view of human cultures as 'personality writ large.'" Each culture, Benedict >> explains, chooses from "the great arc of human potentialities" only a few >> characteristics which become the leading personality traits of the persons >> living in that culture. These traits comprise an interdependent >> constellation of aesthetics and values in each culture which together add up >> to a unique gestalt. For example she described the emphasis on restraint in >> Pueblo cultures of the American southwest, and the emphasis on abandon in >> the Native American cultures of the Great Plains. She used the Nietzschean >> opposites of "Apollonian" and "Dionysian" as the stimulus for her thought >> about these Native American cultures. She describes how in ancient Greece, >> the worshipers of Apollo emphasized order and calm in their celebrations. In >> contrast, the worshipers of Dionysus, the god of wine, emphasized wildness, >> abandon, letting go. And so it was among Native Americans. She described in >> detail the contrasts between rituals, beliefs, personal preferences amongst >> people of diverse cultures to show how each culture had a "personality" that >> was encouraged in each individual." >> >> Pirsig later in chapter 9 of LILA: >> “Sometimes you can see your own society's issues more clearly when they are >> put in an exotic context like that of the brujo in Zuni. That is a huge >> reward from the study of anthropology. As Phaedrus thought about this >> context again and again it became apparent there were two kinds of good and >> evil involved.” [The two kinds are static and Dynamic, of course.] >> “To cling to Dynamic Quality alone apart from any static patterns is to >> cling to chaos. He saw that much can be learned about Dynamic Quality by >> studying what it is not rather than futilely trying to define what it is. >> Static quality patterns are dead when they are exclusive, when they demand >> blind obedience and suppress Dynamic change. But static patterns, >> nevertheless, provide a necessary stabilizing force to protect Dynamic >> progress from degeneration. Although Dynamic Quality, the Quality of >> freedom, creates this world in which we live, these patterns of static >> quality, the quality of order, preserve our world. Neither static nor >> Dynamic Quality can survive without the other." >> >> >> >> 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 > 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 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
