[MD] MD Two Theses in the MOQ

[David M]

Mike

Yes language allows us to isolate and recognise
SQ or objects in our experience, but via habit
and fetish it also blinds us to the richer SQ/DQ
mix of our experience, but we can move on and
re-think our experience as in the move from SOM
to MOQ as an example. Language has a dual
covering/uncovering effect as Heidegger pointed out.

DM


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Hamilton" <thethemichael at gmail.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 11:28 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] MD Two Theses in the MOQ


> Ian,
> 
> Thinking about it, I think it was specifically your "to name it is to
> kill it" that made me bristle. If you'd said "to define it is to kill
> it", then fine. But to name something is to give it life, not to kill
> it. Yes, defining Quality would kill it. But imagine: what kind of a
> life would Quality have if Pirsig had never named it? It would just be
> a vague notion held by Pirsig and nobody else (although I'm not sure
> if it could even be notion...can you have a notion of something that
> isn't signified? this twists me up just thinking about it). You might
> say that it would still have life because it has so many other names:
> the Tao, the One etc. But this only shows how something needs to have
> a name.
> 
> By writing about it, Pirsig breathed life into Quality. Language is
> our friend, not something to be suspicious of.
> 
> Regards,
> Mike
> 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/
>