Hi Horse, and Khoo,

Inserted below:


On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Horse <[email protected]> wrote:

> Khoo, before you go (and it's my sincere wish that you don't) could you
> explain to me how one comes to a mystic understanding through intellect?
> Neither myself, DMB, Ron, Arlo etc. etc. wish to denigrate DQ or subsume
> it within Intellect.
>

[IG] Clearly no-one wishes to denigrate DQ, but wishing and acting are
different things.


> The problem here is that some do not appear to understand the nature of a
> philosophical discussion group. I have, I believe, experienced DQ through
> both music and Iaido and I certainly have no wish to dismiss DQ as
> irrelevant or otherwise. It was also DMB who managed to get it through my
> thick skull that DQ is central to Quality so I know damn well that he
> understands the DQ/Quality relationship.
> However, using something called a 'DQ perspective' or claiming to be a
> mystic in order to trash intellect is also immoral within an intellectual
> environment.
>

[IG] This is where I ring the "straw man" bell. You are implying in your
impersonal statement, that certain persons ARE trashing intellect. Guessing
who you're talking about, I have to say, I haven't seen it.

>
> So if you haven't already unsubscribed please explain to me where I am
> being unreasonable.
>

[IG] Ah, therein lies the rub. Unreasonable depends on your definition of
reason. Pirsig and MoQ attempts to widen GOF-Intellect beyond the simple,
classical concepts.


> Are you so sure that like many others you aren't confusing the MoQ (static
> quality) with DQ just as some in the past have confused the MoQ with
> reality!!!
> Yes, DQ is central to Quality but the MoQ is not a synonym for Quality -
> or do you believe otherwise?
>

[IG] I can't imagine anyone less confused about that than Khoo. I think the
real problem is those confusing MoQ-Informed Intellect with GOF-SOMist
Intellect. Allowing their love of intellect to kill Quality - as ever the
truer path is the one of balance.

[IG] (BTW Those paragraphs about Pirsig describing a rationality based on
the indefinable as "none-sense" have been addressed many times previously -
this is him stating the problem, not the solution.)

>
> Cheers
>
> Horse
>
>
>
> On 07/06/2013 12:31, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Looks like this eureka moment is too much for some to handle.
>>
>> >From the point of view of Eastern Philosophy, there is no denial of
>> intellect, but merely placing it in its proper place.
>>
>> But from the point of view of Western intellect, there  seems to be a
>> great fear of mysticism derived from self introspection. This is its great
>> limitation.
>>
>> RMP has endeavoured to provide a place for it in the expansion of
>> intellect by including Quality or Dynamic Quality in the centre of the MOQ.
>>
>> However, recent discussion has been anti-mysticism and by extension
>> anti-Quality, anti DQ.
>>
>> One needs to rise above intellect to experience DQ.
>> I have been waiting years for signs of this realisation by the discussion
>> group.
>>
>> Alas. the moment there is a glimmer of this happening, the moderator
>> wishes to stamp it out.
>>
>> I post occassionally from the Eastern perspective in what is practically
>> a Western Forum.
>>
>> But there is no place for my views here, moderate as they are, so I will
>> leave.
>>
>> Thank you all for a decade and more of your exchanges.
>>
>> All the best.
>>
>> Goodbye.
>> Khoo Hock Aun
>>
>> Unsubscribe.
>> Sent by DiGi from my BlackBerry® Smartphone
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Horse <[email protected]>
>> Sender: moq_discuss-bounces@lists.**moqtalk.orgDate: Fri, 07 Jun 2013
>> 11:57:39
>> To: <[email protected]>
>> Reply-To: [email protected]
>> Subject: [MD] DQ vs. Intellect?
>>
>> Greetings MD-ers
>>
>> ##############################**#####################
>> *MOQ_DISCUSS - Charter and Rules*
>>
>> The MOQ_DISCUSS mailing list exists to provide a general and
>> free-ranging forum for the discussion of Robert M. Pirsig's *Metaphysics
>> of Quality*.
>>
>> ##############################**#####################
>>
>> I think much of the problem here is that MD is (and always has been) set
>> up to discuss Pirsig's MoQ and not set up as Mystics 'R' Us!!
>> The foundation of the MoQ is an intellect centred text which requires an
>> intellectual approach - to simply state that intellectual values are
>> unwelcome, evil or redundant in an intellectual environment is ridiculous!
>>
>> The problem, as I see it, is that approaching an intellectually centred
>> discussion group from a 'mystic perspective' produces a great number of
>> problems - not least of which is the apparent mystical desire to
>> circumvent rationality and ignore trivialities such as definitions! What
>> this produces is an 'anything goes' environment in which intellect and
>> rationality are flushed down the toilet.
>>
>> MD is a philosophy discussion group and as such needs to apply the rules
>> of philosophy to any discussion. This requires a rational and
>> intellectual approach. It also requires the use of rational definitions
>> - not self-contradictory statements which support a non-intellectual
>> point of view.
>>
>> What I've been seeing here recently is an attempt to undermine the
>> intellectual aspect of the MoQ by the inappropriate use of a 'mystical
>> perspective' - and, according to the MoQ and it's author, this is just
>> plain bullshit. A 'mystical perspective' (i.e. a DQ centred approach
>> within an intellect centred environment) is, literally, non sense! How
>> the hell do you have a discussion about that which cannot be defined?
>> There is no definition of DQ - it's a logical and rational impossibility
>> - and without a definition there can be no discussion!
>>
>> DMB, Ron, Arlo, et alia, are doing exactly the right thing by calling
>> out certain people as anti-intellectual, when they are using a
>> non-existent (by definition) 'perspective' to undermine the principles
>> of the environment within which they are situated. This is not a
>> strawman argument, it is to prevent a self-serving attempt to undermine
>> and destroy a valid approach to a philosophical system of thought.
>> You do not do DQ justice by destroying Intellectual patterns any more
>> than you do justice to Intellectual patterns by destroying Social
>> patterns where there is no threat to intellect. DQ is not being
>> threatened, relegated or ignored by Intellect on MD so to use this as an
>> excuse to do so is, at best, specious.
>>
>>
>> So, for those 'mystics' who wish to remain within the MD I will make
>> this, initially, polite request.
>> Please refrain from specious arguments using a non-existent viewpoint to
>> support an intent to destroy a forum which exists to discuss a
>> philosophical proposition which requires an intellectual and rational
>> approach. If you are unable to do so then please leave and find
>> somewhere that will fit your requirements better.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Horse
>>
>>
> --
>
> "Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production
> deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid."
> — Frank Zappa
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/**listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-**moqtalk.org<http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org>
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/**pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.**org/<http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/>
> http://moq.org/md/archives.**html <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