Andre, There might be one or two other terms I used in David's exercise that need clarifying but it's good someone is taking note of at least one!
You stated March 28th: > I seem to remember Pirsig saying the same thing during the AHP > conference, that, as soon as you start conceptualizing, thinking about > it, the activity of symbol manipulation, you are in the static. That is, > the activity is a static exercise/a static process following static rules. The exact quote would be helpful but, yes, Pirsig has written/said similar elsewhere. But to clarify, I'd say the activity of conceptualising is Dynamic (i.e. the creative artistic part) while the rules and symbols themselves are static. For instance, while I write this e-mail, that is Dynamic. By the time you read it, it will be static. A philosophy discussion is Dynamic - while it happens. A recording of the discussion will be static. Same with a philosophy book (it's a static product of a - largely - Dynamic process). Moreover, any NEW thoughts you have inspired by the philosophy book (or my e-mail or the discussion) is Dynamic. Hope that helps, Anthony. > Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 11:08:18 +0200 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [MD] Dewey's Zen > > Andre: > Thank you Anthony and dmb for presenting us with both your versions of > this fun experiment. > > I do have a question though with regards to what Anthony said which has > nagged me for quite some time prior to this as well. > Anthony said: > Thinking is [Dynamic but] could not even exist without the felt > qualities of [the aesthetic continuum]: > > Andre: > I understand that 'thinking' is a (let's for clarity's sake say) ongoing > process/activity. But is it "Dynamic" (with a capital D)? > > My understanding of Dynamic, as used within the MOQ is that its result > is always new (because it shatters static patterns) and that it is > 'arrived' at at that moment of not-thinking/not intellectualizing (This > is how I read the example in ZMM of Poincaré and e.g. the classroom > method...and the heart attack patient and the person experiencing a > storm and the hearing of this wonderful new song). > > I seem to remember Pirsig saying the same thing during the AHP > conference, that, as soon as you start conceptualizing, thinking about > it, the activity of symbol manipulation, you are in the static. That is, > the activity is a static exercise/a static process following static rules. > > I mean, in ZMM the narrator 'laments' the realization that he hasn't had > a new thought in years. I presume he wasn't walking around as a zombie. > No, he just kept his nose clean, did odd jobs here and there and lived > an 'ordinary' family life. I wonder how many of us are in that same > boat. We may think we are wonderfully dynamic and what have you, but > most appear just variations on the same theme(this is my understanding > of static quality patterns). > > A bit like Pirsig's comment on the activities of the conservatives: > "They are just doing the usual cover-up for the rich in their age-old > exploitation of the poor". (LILA, p 225) And, let's be honest: they come > up with some very creative ideas but still... . > > What am I missing? I would really appreciate some clarification on this. . 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
