Hi All
I just thought I'd throw in some thoughts and quote's regarding S's and O's 'n' stuff
while I'm
thinking about the last few posts.
Subject-Object Dichotomy
"The dichotomy is an interimplicative distinction between thinkers and what they think
about,
in which each pre-supposes the other. If there are no subjects then neither are there
objects
in the true sense, and conversely.
A subject-object dichotomy is acknowledged in most western philosophical traditions,
but
especially in Continental philosophy, beginning with Kant and carrying through
idealist
thought in Fichte, Schelling, Hegel and Schopenhauer. It is also prominent in
intentionalist
philosophy, in the empirical psychology of Brentano, the object theory of Meinong,
Ernst
Mally and Twardowski and the transcendental phenomenology of Husserl. Subject-Object
dichotomy is denied by certain mysticisms, renounced as the philosophical fiction of
duality, of which Cartesian mind-body dualism is a particular instance and
criticized by
mystics as a confusion that prevents mind from recognizing its essential oneness with
the
world, thereby contributing to unnecessary intellectual and moral dilemmas."
>From the Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy
While there is no explicit mention of subject/object metaphysics, it is clearly stated
that a
dichotomy ("A division into two, esp. a sharply defined one" and/or "The result of
such a
division" Concise Oxford Dictionary) exists and is widely acknowledged. So, what
exactly is
it that is being acknowledged as a sharply defined division into two parts. It says
above that
the distinction(division) is between thinkers and what they think about. So given
sufficient
thinkers and a reasonable time what they think about would probably include most
things -
or at least logically, thinkers and what they can think about would reasonably include
the set
of all things.
It's not an enormous leap from here to assume that some form of metaphysical position
centred around subject/object is implicit in the above.
Pirsig, as far as I'm aware, does not refer to THE subject/object metaphysics, only to
A
subject/object metaphysics. At worst Pirsig has elevated the position of
subject/object
division a notch or two above it's 'proper' place, although if thinkers and what they
do and can
think about includes everything then the dichotomy(division) of subject and object is
the
division of everything into either subject or object (or both in some cases). This
doesn't
sound too far from the notion of A subject/object metaphysics which could include any
or
many of the western philosophical traditions mentioned.
Horse
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
