Andre said to Marsha:
... When are you going to argue something coherent around the writings of
Pirsig in the light of what the Buddha taught us that makes sense? That seems
to be your hypothetical mission here but as soon as you receive any form of
criticism in the light of a quote you present you slither away like an eel in a
bucket full of snot. As far as I am aware you still think that the MoQ =
Reality ( like the menu = the food). You still argue that DQ = sq (therefore
all sq is hypothetical and illusory). You still deny the role of latching, you
still argue intellect = SOM (reified and all). All these are contrary to
Pirsig's statements and mission in an effort to develop a metaphysics that will
improve the world a little bit. The only response we get from you is like the
latest fashion show; at present the magic word is 'detachment', stop thinking
(that's evil's reification itself) be 'in the now', and all suffering will just
vanish.
dmb says:
Yes, apparently she thinks it's just fine to slither away from every criticism
of her thinking because thinking itself is the enemy. She consistently
misinterprets Pirsig along these anti-intellectual lines. The purpose of mystic
meditation, he says, is to bring one's self closer to experience "by
eliminating stale, confusing, static, intellectual attachments of the past."
Instead of taking meditation as a way to eliminate stale, confusing
attachments, she takes it as a way to eliminate static intellect altogether.
Why would she want to do that? Like you said, she thinks that all thought is
SOM, that thought can never escape from the conceptual error known as
reification. Instead of eliminating the error, those stale confusing
attachments of the past, she thinks the purpose of the MOQ is to eliminate
thinking itself - in favor of meditation or pure DQ. But that's not what Pirsig
is saying at all.
He tells us what the purpose of meditation as part of a larger explanation as
to the meaning of the "static-Dynamic division of Quality". It's part of the
hot stove example, wherein the front-edge of his experience is Dynamic, and he
acts in response and then "later he generates static patterns of thought to
explain the situation". Who would jump of the stove faster, "those who study
only subject-object science" or "those who study only meditative mysticism"?
The mystics students would jump first, Pirsig says.
While subject-object science can rightly be identified with the "disease", the
"cure" is NOT to "study only meditative mysticism". The cure is the MOQ, a
philosophy that incorporates and acknowledges the empirical validity of mystic
meditation. It's a philosophy that's far more empirical than subject-object
science and including these kinds of experiences is an example of the MOQ's
radical empiricism. So I take the quote to mean that the purpose of meditation
is to improve the quality of thought by bringing it closer to actual
experience, not to eliminate thought. This expanded empiricism is precisely
what eliminates SOM and the reification problem, just as in Buddhism.
"In order to understand what is being said here, one should try and imagine all
things, objects of experience and oneself, the one who is experiencing, as just
a flow of perceptions. We do not know that there is something "out there". We
have only experiences of colours, shapes, tactile data, and so on. We also
don't know that we ourselves are anything than a further series of experiences.
Taken together, there is only an ever-changing flow of perceptions
(vijnaptimatra)... Due to our beginningless ignorance we construct these
perceptions into enduring subjects and objects confronting each other. This is
irrational, things are not really like that, and it leads to suffering and
frustration. The constructed objects are the conceptualised aspect. The flow of
perceptions which forms the basis for our mistaken constructions is the
dependent aspect."
(Paul Williams, "Mahayana Buddhism", Routledge, 1989, p.83/84).
And what would that do to the quality of one's life, anyway? We can't go
through life without thinking the only issue is whether we do it badly or not.
In any case, the quote should be continued because Pirsig goes on to say
something about SOM as a stale, confusing attachment of the past and about the
MOQ as an improved way of thinking....
"In a subject object metaphysics morals and art are worlds apart... But in the
Metaphysics of Quality that division doesn't exist. They're the same. They both
become much more intelligible when references to what is subject and objective
are completely thrown away and references to what is static and what is Dynamic
are taken up instead."
"The second of James' two main systems of philosophy ...was his radical
empiricism. By this he meant that subjects and objects are secondary. They are
concepts derived from something more fundamental which he described as 'the
immediate flux of life which furnishes the material to our later reflection
with its conceptual categories.' In this basic flux of experience, the
distinctions of reflective thought, such as those between consciousness and
content, subject and object, mind and matter, have not yet emerged in the forms
we make them. ...James had condensed this description to a single sentence:
There must always be a discrepancy between concepts and reality, because the
former are static and discontinuous while the latter is dynamic and flowing.'
Here James had chosen exactly the same words Phaedrus had used for the basic
subdivision of the Metaphysics of Quality." (364-5)
This is the basic subdivision Marsha does not comprehend. Although it's
presented over the course of the whole book, described in a paragraph and then
condensed into a single sentence, she just can't grasp the meaning.
It's a mighty strong case of confirmation bias wherein none of the evidence is
understood AS evidence or otherwise comprehended.
The result is total paralysis.
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
