Hi Glove, (and others),
This is a somewhat late responds to your post of 17/03.
I wrote
> The types mentioned are Formative DQ and Contributive DQ, representing the
> Universal perspective of DQ and the Human perspective of DQ (experience).
I agree with David that this is a distinction between cosmology and epistemology. I
wonder
if we all agree (maybe exept for you Glove) on that DQ has different aspects and that
these aspects reflect the perspectives of DQ in cosmology, epistemology and ontology.
This doesn't mean however that it is an independently existing reality apart from our
own experience.
Glove:
> I cannot help but feel that there is something wrong with this prospective
> of universal and human experience from the Metaphysics of Quality
> standpoint. If we assume there is a universal prospective, we must also
> assume that it exists as an independently existing "something", perhaps like
> an object "out there" that experiences quite independently from the
> subjective "us" as humans. Isn't this just a continuation of subject/object
> metaphysics? Seems so to me...
You're right. The way you put it is a continuation of subject/object metaphysics, but
you didn't hear me
say that the prospectives were independent! I don't think there's a form of DQ existing
independently "out there". I think the DQ that accounts for the forming of SPoV's
(formative
or universal DQ) can somehow be experienced by human-beings (probably also by other
SPoV's). Pirsig uses the examples of the hot stove and music to link the cosmological
aspect of DQ with the epistemological aspect. He jumps in these perspectives from one
to
the other, maybe just to show that they've got the same ground. Yet it has helped me
a lot (and still does) in the thinking about the nature of DQ, to distinguish between
perspectives.
I have tried to figure out what the essence is of the difference between your view and
mine.
I remember your struction and intellect as discreation concepts. I have to be true
Glove that
I never really got it. I still have several posts from a view month back and your
website which I want to respond to.
You wrote:
> Simply put, Dynamic Quality does not exist, nor does universal
> cosmology. Going further now, it will be seen that the Quality Event itself
> does not exist except in the ordering of the self and the ordering of the
> world as self agrees it should be ordered. The universe has no order other
> than what the phenomenal self agrees it has. This is where value arises,
> from the phenomenal self, and not outside the self from an independently
> existing reality.
Could it be that the main difference is that I am a realist in my view on reality and
you are an idealist?
Gd Dtchgrtngs
Walter
MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
