Ant,

Ones experience of the sun is one that is ever-changing as the sun moves 
position through the sky and as ones visual perspective and context changes.  
Even moving ones head changes the experience.  And I thought the MoQ was to 
change the everyday understanding from one of self and objects to one where the 
world is nothing but value.  I didn't think it was to keep the everyday mundane 
understanding in a static state of ignorance.  -   I would certainly recommend 
your PhD thesis and Textbook as a valuable resource. 


Marsha

On Feb 4, 2013, at 6:05 PM, Ant McWatt <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> Marsha wrote to X-man (Ron) and Dave Buchanan, Feb 5th 2013:
> 
> Here's my definition of the self: the “self” is a flow of 
> ever-changing, conditionally co-dependent and impermanent static 
> patterns value in the infinite field of Dynamic Quality.
> 
> 
> Dave Buchanan responded:
> 
> As I've pointed out many times, your definition of the self is 
> contradictory. Obviously, if the self "flows" and is "ever-changing" 
> then it can not also be a "static" pattern. Those are contradictory 
> terms and so your definition is nonsense. Can't you think of a way to 
> say it that doesn't contradict standard definitions or violate basic 
> logic
> 
> Words like "flowing" and "ever-changing" can rightly
> be used to describe the "Dynamic", but not the "static" or the 
> "patterned". Since "static" and "Dynamic" are such central terms in the 
> MOQ, your contradictory definition is especially egregious.
> 
> egregious |iˈgrējəs|adjective  outstandingly bad; shocking 
> 
> 
> Ant McWatt comments:
> 
> This reminds of the more esoteric material (Joseph Margolis? - I can't 
> remember off the top of my head) that Scott Roberts introduced seven-eight 
> years ago.  You can just go on and on in these logical circles; spinning 
> words like a logical positivist on speed...  Anyway, as Dave is saying, LILA 
> is basically written from the static perspective of the "everyday, mundane 
> world" where, for pragmatic reasons, it's just easier to presume the 
> components of the self are static, or better still (as Marsha implied), so we 
> don't confuse Pirsig's static-Dynamic terminology with the concepts of 
> Newtonian physics, "stable".  (The latter modification is noted by Pirsig as 
> an improvement somewhere in the correspondence). 
> 
> Of course, in my academic correspondence with Pirsig which Marsha enjoys 
> quoting extensively from the MOQ Textbook and PhD (btw, still both available 
> as PDF files from the groovy looking shop at robertpirsig.org!!!), the 
> Dynamic perspective of the "Buddha's World" was introduced, and, of course, 
> the essential  nature of the (dependent) static patterns are seen as 
> ever-changing and impermanent from that perspective.  But some of these 
> changes - such as our sun slowly burning itself out - are outside many human 
> lifetimes.  Though I think it's important to realise that perspective is 
> there (especially in regards to avoiding dukkha/personal imbalance), it can 
> confuse things (certainly when discussing the MOQ) if you're not making it 
> clear that it is this perspective you're taking.  
> 
> And, then, you can apply the logic of the Tetralemma and be really strict 
> about what you can and can not assert about reality (and its various 
> components) but how useful is that type of academic exercise for maintaining 
> your bike or getting on with your wife or encouraging world peace, love and 
> understanding?  Not much really.  It's academic, fat man in the refrigator 
> time.  A little bit degenerate and essentially self-serving. 
> (Though having said that, I'm still looking forward to receiving Paul 
> Turner's new, updated thoughts about the Tetralemma - for publication at 
> robertpirsig.org - in the next couple of weeks or so.  Who's for MOQ 
> cheeseburger and freedom fries?!)  
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Ant
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
>                         
> 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
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

Reply via email to