" ... Strictly speaking, the creation of any metaphysics is an immoral act
since it's a lower form of evolution, intellect, trying to devour a higher
mystic one. The same thing that's wrong with philosophology when it tries to
control and devour philosophy is wrong with metaphysics when it tries to devour
the world intellectually. It attempts to capture the Dynamic within a static
pattern. But it never does. You never get it right. So why try? It's like
trying to construct a perfect unassailable chess game. No matter how smart you
are you're never going to play a game that is 'right' for all people at all
times, everywhere. Answers to ten questions led to a hundred more and answers
to those led to a thousand more. Not only would he never get it right; the
longer he worked on it the wronger it would probably get. . . . ". (LILA)
Ron said to Marsha:
Thats the point, you don't really understand what RMP writes. Especially if you
consider that quote as a validation to your assertions. One can't use a quote
from a narrative story as though it were to be taken as a true-ism, applicable
as a clear statement concerning any context. The story evolves along with the
characters thus what is stated also evolves to a conclusion. ...
dmb says:
Apparently, Marsha thinks the quote counts as evidence against something I
said. One can only wonder what she thinks it means. Since Pirsig refuses to
define DQ, his MOQ never attempts to devour the mystic reality. To say, "there
must always be a discrepancy between concepts and reality" is just another way
of saying that DQ cannot be defined. Pirsig asserts this same idea over and
over again and all of these statements are consistent with each other.
"Quality is a direct experience independent of and prior to intellectual
abstractions." This is another way to say that DQ can never be captured or
encapsulated by concepts and definitions. It's another way of saying ideas are
always derived from the primary empirical reality. Unlike the intellectual
abstractions, which are "static and discontinuous", "reality,.. is dynamic and
flowing". Immediate experience is the primary reality, is DQ, and static
quality is always derived from this dynamic flux. That's what Pirisg means when
he says "Quality is the source and substance of everything". That what he means
when he says Quality is not a metaphysical chess piece. This is what he means
when he says that truth is subordinate to the Good.
Obviously, Pirsig has not used his own quote to prohibit the creation of the
Metaphysics of Quality.
Basically, I've claimed that Marsha does not understand the first thing about
the MOQ so here response, apparently, is to post a quote suggesting that trying
to understand Pirsig's philosophy is immoral.
C'mon, seriously. How confused and incoherent is that? Pirsig rejected his own
philosophy as immoral? Marsha is a ridiculous troll who seems determined to
prove that nothing can ever make sense or even that making sense is some kind
of evil. She simply not the kind of person who belongs in any discussion group.
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
