Folks.
Even if an acute exhaustion made me withdraw I sort of follow the
discussion...and the MOQ is as fresh to me as ever and constantly
opens new views. This month�s topic hasn�t exactly turned people
on and after reading Jonathan�s latest I believed that he had
succeeded in leading everyone astray, but there are a few who
understand. As usual it is the Intellectual level which is the acid
test of the MOQ.
The subject-object metaphysics will haunt the MOQ forever if not
the �mind� notion of Q-Intellect is done away with, and Dan Glover
most appropriately brings up a Pirsig quote that has become some
sort of a....(the expression escapes me. A text from a holy book
much debated).
Pirsig says:
> �The word �mind� is freighted with all sorts of historic
> philosophical disputation. Buddhists use it much differently than
> Western idealists who use it much differently than Western
> materialists. Like the term �God,� it�s best avoided. To prevent
> confusion, the MOQ treats �mind� as the exact equivalent of �static
> intellectual patterns� and avoids use of the term when possible.�
> (From Pirsig�s letter to Ant, January 2nd 1998)
I think Pirsig is a bit defensive here and should have taken it all
out ....to prevent confusion.To treat �mind� as the exact equivalent
of Q- Intellect and otherwise avoid it is next to impossible. Hamish
Muirhead has presented an alternative static sequence with no
Intellectual level, and I agree whole-heartedly. If Intellect is
equalized with SOM�s �mind� there is no such level at all. The Q-
intellect is out of Q-Society and no subjective mindish realm.
Regarding metaphors they fall - along with language as such - on
the subjective side of SOM. Words are symbols, descriptions of
something at the objective side; �horse� the essence of all such
animals. Perhaps are metaphors - the essence of essences - but
from the SOM p.o.v. they are even more abstract and deeper into
the subjective recesses. And, according to Jonathan, as the MOQ
is presented by language it is metaphorical, ie. subjective. He
views the MOQ in light of the SOM and that is not the way to do it.
Bo
PS for Andreas. If my German serves me "sinn" primarily means
'mind' and 'sinnbild' a mental picture, and as such in line with the
above definition of subjectivity. However if 'meaning' is an aspect of
it a "Metaphysics of Metaphors" (MOM) is possible along with the
many MOQ mutations we have encountered here: Metaphysics of
Language, -of Meaning, -of Significance (remember Charles
Peirce). If THAT is your (and Jonathan's) point I humbly beg
everybody's pardon.
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
