At 07:08 AM 7/3/2007, you wrote: > [SA previously] > > >This idea of a boat, this creative idea about a >boat that nobody > > else had, or even if somebody made a boat >differently than > > >somebody else. This, to me, is imagination, and I >place this in the > abstract position (intellectual >level) due to it not found represented > anywhere >else. > > [Marsha] > > Might this imagination & creativity be the Code of >Art which is > > independent of all levels? > > This might be why I'm noticing abstraction before >the Greeks. The Code of Art is dynamic quality >conflicting with intellectual quality, hence >creativity, right? If I can pull code of art and >social level away from intellectual, then the latter >will be seen even more clearly, a? That's one way I >guess. When I searched Lila to find code of art I >found only one paragraph representing this seemingly >important idea. Is code of art dq with all levels or >just intellectual quality? If code of art is >creativity I would say yes. If code of art is >creativity with imagination, thus, the mind only, well >then we're only talking about the right and left >hemisphere, therefore splitting the mind in two, which >I highly doubt this is what Pirsig meant. > >SA
SA, You are correct, there is very little explanation of the Code of Art. It seems to me that it can effect at least the social and intellectual levels. It might be defined as the total focus on an activity that lifts that activity, be it social level or intellectual level, to a new dimension. I see it as an experience rather than a static pattern of value. It's movement outside of a pattern. I don't think it must be dependent on imagination, but I don't know. Do you think total absorption in an activity a requirement? Marsha 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/
