Hi Dan, Responding to your post . . .
> Hi Platt > > Thank you for your reply. The MOQ is built on morality: "Because Quality is > morality. Make no mistake about it. They're identical. And if Quality is > the primary reality of the world then that means morality is also the > primary reality of the world. The world is primarily a moral order." (LILA) Full agreement. Also according to the MOQ, morality equals reality equals values equals Quality equals direct experience. From LILA, Chap. 5: [Dan] "Quality is a direct experience independent of and prior to intellectual abstractions." This statement begs the question, "Direct experience by whom or what?" Pirsig denies the question, saying: "Quality is indivisible, undefinable and unknowable in the sense that there is a knower and a known . . ." Right off the bat, Pirsig admits to a impasse. His MOQ really can't be described. But, he'll go ahead and describe it anyway. This creates an almost insurmountable block in comprehending the MOQ. But, acknowledging that difficulty, let us continue. [Dan] > Morality means to help others, or at least to do no harm. In the MOQ, morality exists at four levels with each level attempting to dominate the others. Thus, there is a constant war going on between the levels. So "helping" or "not harming" is NOT what morality means in the MOQ. Morality in the MOQ means conflict between moral levels plus a mysterious moral force called Dynamic Quality. [Dan] > Looking to > Buddhism there are 4 noble truths. (1) Suffering, (2) Sources of suffering, > (3) Cessation of suffering, (4) True paths. I understand this is the start of an explanation of why the "self" is considered by Pirsig to be an illusion, "an empty concept." [Dan] > Suffering is like an illness we all have. In order to effect a cure, we > have to diagnose the illness. Buddhism teaches there are 3 types of > suffering: pain, change, and pervasive conditioning. We all know what pain > feels like. Change is like the song that we hear for the first time and it > sounds so good that we go out and buy it. We can't wait to get home and > listen to it. And it sounds good. But not quite as good as the first time. > And after we listen to it several times it loses its luster. We don't > understand why we liked it so much in the beginning. That is called the > suffering of change. > > The third level of suffering is deeper. Pervasive conditioning arises when > we begin to see ourselves separate and apart from the world. People become > what they produce. Their function is to make money to buy more and more and > more. There is a Buddhist saying that the wealthier a person becomes the > greater the suffering they endure. The fundamental misconception of the > self as separate and apart from the world gives rise to hatred, lust, envy, > and belligerance. When you are hit you want to hit back. > > Buddhism teaches that the solution to suffering is the process of > overcoming the pervasive conditioning of seeing the self as separate from > the world. We have to understand the true nature of people and things. When > the individual self is seen as an empty concept, as a convenient shorthand, > Buddhism teaches that we enter a state beyond suffering. The true path is > morality. Thus the MOQ is built on morality. > > I hope this helps answer your very good question. > Dan I don't buy all the suffering bit, but I agree that the MOQ and Buddhism both claim the "true nature" of the world, i.e., reality, is the absence of any division between self and other, or knower and known -- that the commonly held conceptual division between subject/object, mind/matter, self/other, etc. is a delusion and a snare. Thus, the MOQ posits a disembodied "pure experience" as the essence of reality. Moreover, this "pure experience" is the same as Quality which is the same as Morality. And to the question, "Experience by whom or what?" the answer appears to be "Don't ask, because the only possible answer has to be expressed in words that divide what is essentially indivisible." So I basically agree with your interpretation of how Buddhism and the MOQ view the self or individual. But if all this be true, how in the world do you convince the Douglas Hofstadters of the world who claim "I am a strange loop."??? Or forget Hofstadter, how do I explain it to my 12 year old granddaughter? Best regards, Platt 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
