Greetings, Andre (and all) --
On Sun, July 01, 2012 7:35 AM, "Andre Broersen" <[email protected]>
wrote:
Ron (previously) to Andre:
That's a great philosophical question Andre, "how do you
know unity, oneness, whole?" you said we know them statically, which
feels like the right direction. Quality then is the primary explanatory
factor in our philosophical theories? and in this way
we can say that Quality is one because it is the basis and
beginning? on which all explanation extends.
But That is probably the only way I'd say that Quality is "one".
?
Andre:
I think that's right Ron. In Pirsig's words the MoQ is a high-quality
static intellectual pattern of value because of it's economy of
statement, explanatory power (where there wasn't before) and the
harmony it produces. Dq/sq is as you suggest 'the basis and beginning on
which all explanation extends' and I would add depends. I tend to see this
in the context of Pirsig echoing Abraham Maslow on the AHP tapes when he
says that we need something bigger than ourselves ( I think in response to
and reaction against scientism, positivism, populism and churchly stuff).
In this same context I prefer to change the notion of man being the
measure of all things into DQ/sq is the measure of all things. An evolving
wherein 'Man' is a participant. Like William James insisting that 'the
human being is continuous with Something More'.
Not sure if this makes sense.
Well, for what it's worth, I am sure it doesn't make sense. And I'll tell
you why.
Pythagoras was right. Man IS the measure of all things. This is what he is
biologically and psychically equipped for and what his entire
life-experience is about. Indeed, the unique ability to experience
valuistically and distinguish what is virtuous, moral, worthy, useful, and
desirable from what is not describes man's role in existence as well or
better than any religious credo or philosophical maxim I know. Without this
discriminative measuring ability, there would be no reason or meaning for
human existence.
This is what concerns me about positing Quallity (Value) as an external
existent which independently guides or controls man's preferences, thereby
denying him free choice. The idea has led to the absurd notion of a robotic
man swept toward some utopian betterness in the flow of evolving Quality.
It is inconceivable to me that the cosmic plan would "evolve" a creature
with such exquisite sensibility unless this faculty were intended to be
nurtured and used for optimal value realization throughout one's
life-experience.
We debate, argue, analyze, and analogize in this forum over whether Quality
is a monism, as if a monism is what is needed to make sense of a value-based
metaphysics, while doing our best to forget that we are all sensible
subjects. Neither Value nor Morality is an existent in itself. The
"monism" you are looking for is Ultimate Reality, from which Value is
differentiated by human sensibility.
If you are seeking a metaphysical paradigm for existence, I suggest that you
consider this one:
Existence is the value agent's relational perspective of otherness -- the
reality in whose Oneness there is no other.
Essentially 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
