Hi dmb, > One of the sources of confusion here is that you're both reading my claims as > if I were talking about the mystic reality or Dynamic Quality itself - even > though I keep telling that I'm not talking about mysticism or the ultimate > reality. Obviously, we need to be on the same topic if we're going to > understand each other. Please hear me and believe me. By switching the topic > over to mysticism, my claims are moved into a very different context and so > will appear to have a meaning that is very different from my intentions. By > switching the topic over to the mystic reality, you will certainly > misunderstand I'm saying. > And - this is a very important point - if the difference between Pirsig's > expanded rationality and Pirsig's mysticism is blurred or unclear, you will > certainly misunderstand what Pirsig is saying. This is one of Marsha's > central mistakes. She uses the mystic's objection to metaphysics (the > ultimate reality cannot named or otherwise fit into intellectual > descriptions) to denigrate the intellect in general, to distort the pragmatic > theory of truth and the art of rationality. These are two different topics > but she doesn't realize that and the result is to make a big mess of things.
No disagreement here. > Sorry, but you guys both seem to be pushing back at my claims with quotes > from Pirsig on the topic of mysticism - even though I keep insisting that my > point is not on that topic. I take this to mean that you're not acknowledging > the distinction between mysticism and creative intellect. Without this > distinction, the mystic's prohibition against naming the ultimate reality > will be mistaken for a prohibition against naming anything at all, against > intellectual descriptions of any kind. And Presto! You have a very vigorous > form of anti-intellectualism wherein thinking about anything is a degenerate > activity. I hope you can see how this might be quite a problem if your aim is > to expand rationality so that science and philosophy are no longer > value-free. If you will re-read what I wrote dmb, I never disagreed with you on content. I disagreed with you on naming. Furthermore, you're apologising for a disagreement on a philosophical discussion board? What is this? It's like you've just walked into a bar and apologised for having a drink... > That's why you really have to believe me when I tell you that this is NOT > about mysticism. It's about Pirsig's expansion and improvement of intellect - > and Pirsig does this by putting undefined Quality right into the center of > philosophy and science. I agree with the mystic's prohibitions against naming > the ultimate reality but that's simply not what I'm doing. I'm merely > explaining Pirsig ideas, trying to clarify the meaning of his books. I have > nothing to say about the ultimate reality but I have plenty to say about > Pirsig's philosophy The only disagreement I have, if you'll re-read what I wrote, is that of words. You've wanted to *loosely* associate Dynamic Quality with something positive where you write that Dynamic freedom can also be called 'positive freedom'. I have no disagreement with you on content, just the words that you are using. In fact, it's just one word - positive. I have an issue with associating 'Dynamic freedom' with 'positive freedom'. However loosely you want to say that association is, Dynamic freedom is the freedom one experiences as a result of Dynamic Quality. If you associate that freedom with something positive then you are logically associating Dynamic Quality with something positive. I agree, Dynamic Quality is nothing.. But Dynamic Quality still influences the intellectual reality like everything else - in fact, it creates it. We can experience this when we master our ideas to the point where they become second nature.. This is how questions and koans work… 'Does Lila have quality?" Pirsig needed that static quality to continually think about over and over again, he asked the question, over and over again, going further and deeper into the question.. the result.. The MOQ. It is through mastery and the Dynamic freedom found in the mastery of intellectual static patterns that new ideas are created. To call that freedom 'positive freedom' is a huge misnomer because it associates Dynamic Quality with something positive.. I only disagree with you on names not content. Thanks dmb, -David. 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
