Marsha said:
Why do I so often mention mindfulness & meditation and "agrees with my
experience"? Here is two simple paragraphs from 'Mindfulness in Plain English'
that might explain my persistence: [...] I hope you will forgive the above use
of the word 'objectively' and replace it with 'directly'. RMP wrote "Remember
that the central reality of the MOQ is not an object or a subject or anything
else. It is understood by direct experience only and not by reasoning of any
kind." The practice of meditation/mindfulness is the pursuit of Quality, both
Dynamic and static, beyond the limitations of language. It does not end the
appreciation of language or intellect or static patterns, it actually enhances
the wisdom associated the appreciation.
Ron replied to Marsha:
I can forgive the use of the term "objectivly" and replace it with "directly"
but the meaning of "objective" still asserts itself in the phrases : "You will
learn for the first time what is (truly) happening to you, around you and
within you." "I want to understand the (true) nature of life." "You'll find
yourself observing things objectively, exactly as they are". It continues to
assert an "ultimate truth" that we can experience "exactly" as it "is". Marsha,
it just doesent get much more objective. I believe it is this "objective" type
of attitude which is causing alot of the conflict. Direct experience is the
test of any and all ideas, it is the proving ground and in this way we may only
gain a better "greater" understanding of ideas we already posess, but it can
not be known as it "is". Our knowledge (understanding) of direct experience is
always culturally derived.
dmb says:
Yes, this is another version of the mistake that Marsha makes over and over
again. It confuses and conflates the static with the Dynamic. Why does she so
often mention mindfulness & meditation as if it granted her some kind of
ultimate truth? Because she is confused about the meaning of the static-Dynamic
distinction. The paragraphs are worded quite badly, such that they expose this
mistake. The quotes frame the issue as a Platonist or SOMer would, and they're
very much at odds with the MOQ in that respect.
Direct experience is neither true nor false. What we SAY about experience can
be true or false. The concepts we use can agree with experience or not. But
direct experience itself is independent of and prior to language. It doesn't
even make sense to say that meditation or mindfulness "agrees with experience"
because it is experience. Truth, in the MOQ, is a static intellectual pattern,
a high-quality concept. Reality itself, the pre-intellectual cutting edge of
experience, is real in the sense that we know it from experience but it can
never be true or false. Static pattens can be true or false, but DQ is always
independent of and prior to our intellectual descriptions.
That's what Pirsig means when he says that DQ, "the central reality of the
MOQ," can be "understood by direct experience only and not by reasoning of any
kind." Pirsig explains this point over and over again. In the basic flux of
experience, Pirsig says, the distinctions of reflective thought have not yet
emerged in the forms we make them. That is why DQ cannot be defined.
Definitions are static and truths are static intellectual patterns. But Marsha
wants experience itself to be some kind of ultimate Truth and she wants static
patterns to be the ever-changing stream of experience.
That is, more or less, backwards. It's preposterous. It's approximately the
opposite of what the MOQ says about the static and the Dynamic and the
distinction between 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)
Sadly, Marsha's confusion does as much damage to mysticism as it does to the
theory of truth. She tries to trump static intellectual truth with some kind of
mystical truth. Trouble is, for philosophical mystics like Pirsig, there is no
such thing as the ultimate truth.
"Some of the most honored philosophers in history have been mystics: ..They
share a common belief that the fundamental nature of reality is outside
language; that language splits things up into parts while the true nature of
reality is undivided." (Lila 63) This early quote fits quite neatly with
James's single sentence, which Pirsig quotes 200 pages later. Language is
static and discontinuous; it chops things up. The central reality is outside of
language, is undivided, continuous and flowing. That's why DQ cannot be defined
and cannot be called true or false. If it's outside of language and prior to
intellectual abstractions, then we simply cannot talk about it. That's why it
cannot be understood by reasoning of any kind.
But the MOQ and its theory of truth CAN be understood by reasoning. The
concepts, definitions and distinctions of the MOQ can and should be understood.
And that's what I'm talking about when I criticize Marsha's confusions.
"The Metaphysics of Quality itself is static and should be separated from the
Dynamic Quality it talks about. Like the rest of the printed philosophic
tradition it doesn't change from day to day, although the world it talks about
does. ...The static language of the Metaphysics of Quality will never capture
the Dynamic reality of the world...."
If the practice of meditation really did enhance the appreciation of language,
concepts and intellectual static patterns, then Marsha must not be doing it
right because she's still profoundly confused about the MOQ and it's central
distinction, it's central enemy and the nature of its mission. But her mixed up
views are NOT the result of meditation and she will never, ever understand the
MOQ until she takes the static intellectual patterns seriously. Since the MOQ
itself is static and intellectual, that's what has to be grasped. But her
anti-intellectual bias will never allow that.
Thus, she is paralyzed by a catch-22 from hell. She's stuck down in a flakey,
new age hole and she hates the only ladder that can get her out of it. She even
sees the rescue effort as a form of persecution, sees reasons and evidence as a
kind of violence. Ironically, the way out of the trap looks like a trap to her.
Because DQ cannot be defined or conceptually known by reasoning of any kind,
she figures, the MOQ's definitions and concepts cannot be defined or
conceptually known.
What a train wreck!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marsha:> Why do I so often mention mindfulness & meditation and "agrees with my
experience"? Here is two simple paragraphs from 'Mindfulness in Plain English'
that might explain my persistence:> > "Vipassana is a form of mental training
that will teach you to experience the world in an entirely new way. You will
learn for the first time what is truly happening to you, around you and within
you. It is a process of self discovery, a participatory investigation in which
you observe your own experiences while participating in them, and as they
occur. The practice must be approached with this attitude.> > "Never mind what
I have been taught. Forget about theories and prejudgments and stereotypes. I
want to understand the true nature of life. I want to know what this experience
of being alive really is. I want to apprehend the true and deepest qualities of
life, and I don't want to just accept somebody else'
s explanation. I want to see it for myself." If you pursue your meditation
practice with this attitude, you will succeed. You'll find yourself observing
things objectively, exactly as they are -- flowing and changing from moment to
moment. Life then takes on an unbelievable richness which cannot be described.
It has to be experienced."> > Marsha:> I hope you will forgive the above use of
the word 'objectively' and replace it with 'directly'. RMP wrote "Remember
that the central reality of the MOQ is not an object or a subject or anything
else. It is understood by direct experience only and not by reasoning of any
kind." The practice of meditation/mindfulness is the pursuit of Quality, both
Dynamic and static, beyond the limitations of language. It does not end the
appreciation of language or intellect or static patterns, it actually enhances
the wisdom associated the appreciation. Anyways...
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
