x.gbl> To: [email protected] X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Hi
28 aug 2012 kl. 18.22 skrev david buchanan: > > Marsha said: > It is true that patterns may include a collection of words, and I take > patterns as hypothetical (supposed but not neccesarily real or true). I > think considering patterns to be hypothetical acknowledges the incompleteness > of patterns and makes room for new possibilities. ...I'll stick to > considering static patterns of value as hypothetical. ...I did not state > that 'truth' was wrong, bad or didn't exist. I stated that I value more > highly using the word 'pattern' rather then 'truth'; and I prefer to think of > patterns as 'hypothetical'. ...I prefer to think of objects of knowledge > (patterns) as hypothetical. Once one accepts the MoQ's fundamental principal > that the world is nothing but Value, then 'expanded rationality' occurs when > an individual transforms the natural tendency to reify self and world into > the natural tendency to hold all static patterns of value to be hypothetical > (supposed but not neccesarily real or true.) By using 'hypothetical' > ...After much thoug ht > , I wrote a very careful explanation of why I prefer to think of patterns as > hypothetical: > > > > dmb says: > Marsha is using the MOQ's critique of SOM against the MOQ itself. She is > inappropriately using Pirsig's attack on Objective truth to attack Pirsig's > own pragmatic truth. She has confused the sickness with the medicine. That's > how she ends up denigrating truth, philosophy, the MOQ itself and > intellectual values in general. It's a heart-breaking pile of incoherent > drivel, confusion and conflation of the operative terms, and big heaps of > contradictory nonsense. > > THE PROBLEM - Our modes of rationality are no longer adequate. > > "Our current modes of rationality are not moving society forward into a > better world. They are taking it further and further from that better world. > ...the whole structure of reason, handed down to us from ancient times, is no > longer adequate. It begins to be seen for what it really is...emotionally > hollow, esthetically meaningless and spiritually empty." > "I think the basic fault that underlies the problem of stuckness is > traditional rationality's insistence upon "objectivity," a doctrine that > there is a divided reality of subject and object. For true science to take > place these must be rigidly separate from each other." > "When traditional rationality divides the world into subjects and objects it > shuts out Quality, and when you're really stuck it's Quality, not any > subjects or objects, that tells you where you ought to go." > "the thing to be analyzed, is not Quality, but those peculiar habits of > thought called 'squareness' that sometimes prevent us from seeing it. ..The > subject for analysis, the patient on the table, was no longer Quality, but > analysis itself. Quality was healthy and in good shape. Analysis, however, > seemed to have something wrong with it that prevented it from seeing the > obvious." > "He did nothing for Quality or the Tao. What benefited was reason." The > problem is that "Reason and Quality had become separated and in conflict with > each other" back in the days of Plato. > > THE SOLUTION - A root expansion of rationality through the inclusion of > Quality at it's center; rationality, like motorcycle maintenance, becomes a > form of art. > "He [Phaedrus] felt that the solution started with a new philosophy, or he > saw it as even broader than that...a new spiritual rationality...in which the > ugliness and the loneliness and the spiritual blankness of dualistic > technological reason would become illogical. Reason was no longer to be > "value free." Reason was to be subordinate, logically, to Quality." > "What's emerging from the pattern of my own life is the belief that the > crisis is being caused by the inadequacy of existing forms of thought to cope > with the situation. It can't be solved by rational means because the > rationality itself is the source of the problem. The only ones who're solving > it are solving it at a personal level by abandoning 'square' rationality > altogether and going by feelings alone. Like John and Sylvia here. And > millions of others like them. And that seems like a wrong direction too. So I > guess what I'm trying to say is that the solution to the problem isn't that > you abandon rationality but that you expand the nature of rationality so that > it's capable of coming up with a solution." > "Now I want to show that that classic pattern of rationality can be > tremendously improved, expanded and made far more effective through the > formal recognition of Quality in its operation." > "I think that it will be found that a formal acknowledgment of the role of > Quality in the scientific process doesn't destroy the empirical vision at > all. It expands it, strengthens it and brings it far closer to actual > scientific practice." > "A motorcycle functions entirely in accordance with the laws of reason, and a > study of the art of motorcycle maintenance is really a miniature study of the > art of rationality itself." > Right, David and Marsha The next "pattern" to study after that is Thermodynamics and the art of losing your presumptions.... Jan Anders 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
