Ant McWatt wrote:
This is going to lose some people here (and no doubt elsewhere!) but one of the
primary reasons that the MOQ can be so difficult to pin down for a traditional
Western intellectual is its basis on the logic of the Tetralemma, the four
pronged logic that East Asian philosophies (certainly Buddhist and Taoist
traditions) use rather than the syllogistic logic of Aristotle's which is used
by nearly every Western philosopher that you can read today. The latter are
still largely unaware that East Asian logic can operate in two contradictory
contexts while syllogistic logic can operate (or presumes) that there is only
one. I guess you call the latter "the world of everyday affairs" and is what
all the static quality patterns in the MOQ refer to.
Ron replied:
I disagree, I maintain that The basis of MOQ Rests on the idea "that which does
Not have value, does not exist" Which I believe corresponds with Aristotle,
"the question does not lay Apon whether or not something is or Is not, rather,
it rests on whether or not it has meaning" Pragmatically speaking.
dmb says:
I think there is no need to disagree, Ron, because these are not mutually
exclusive ideas. If I understand it, Pirsig's statement ("that which does not
have value, does not exist") can be understood in terms of the two contexts
described by Ant (conventional static realities and the "ultimate" realities).
Conventional realities (static quality) come into existence because they have
value and the ultimate reality (DQ) is the source of that value. They exist in
a relationship of continual becoming, which we like to think of as an ongoing
evolutionary process. Because the static forms have a limited life span and are
secondary to the ultimate reality, we say they have no essential being or no
primary ontological status.
I'm not sure how helpful it is to explain this with four-pronged logic,
however. Unless the notion of two contexts is grasped first, in fact, it's not
going to make much sense at all. Fortunately, Paul wrote a great paper
explaining some of the differences and distinctions between the two contexts.
It unpacks what the tetralemma condenses, so to speak. Somebody will remember
the title and I'll bet it posted on Ant's website.
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
