[MD] Emergent Consciousness

[david buchanan]

Steve H and all those with an emerging consciousness:

dmb had said:
...What amazes me is that anyone would come to a forum like this to defend 
the autonomous self, victorian morality, theisim, faith and all the other 
stuff that is so thoroughly attacked and deconstructed in Pirsig's books.

Steve H asked:
Were you expecting everyone to agree?  Why would someone join a discussion 
group?

dmb says:
Expecting everyone to agree? Hardly. In fact, I was expressing disagreement 
when I wrote that. Most of what I do here is disagree with people. Its a lot 
more fun that way and ideally everyone's arguments are sharpened by it. I 
learn a lot more that way too. But what I'm complaining about is, for 
example, when theists try to sneak their theism into Pirsig's anti-theistic 
system. What I'm complaining about, for example, is the attempt to alter the 
MOQ so as to enshrine and glorify a thing that the MOQ's author describes as 
a "ridiculous fiction". See, there's plenty of room for legitimate debate, 
but some arguments are so off base, so weak and indefensible that... I mean, 
I think its quite alright to say so when we think an idea is just plain 
wrong. And usually its not very hard to find some textual support, some 
reasons and some logic for making such a charge. This is what really makes 
me crazy. There are way too many posters who persist despite quotes that 
directly contradict their position. How can anyone have a fruitful debate 
about anything with such a "thinker"? Its like people want to redesign the 
MOQ to suite their own tastes and sensibilities. There's something dishonest 
about that, don't you think?

dmb quoted Joe Campbell:
Anyone who says, as Jesus is reported to have said (John 10:30), 'I and the 
Father are One', is declared in our tradition to have blasphemed."

Steve H asked:
You just used a quote from the Bible to defend the destruction of theism.  
Please clarify your position.

dmb answers:
Yes. My position is that the Bilble is the word of God, that God is 
anti-theistic and that there is no such God. I also think Jesus was a Pinko.

But seriously, I think the point was best captured just one sentence earlier 
in that Campbell quote. He said, "Our theology, therefore, begins from the 
point of view of waking consciousness and Aristotelian logic; whereas, on 
another level of consciousness - and this, the level to which all religions 
must finally refer - the ultimate mystery transcends the laws of dualistic 
logic, causality and space-time. Anyone who says, as Jesus is reported to 
have said (John 10:30), 'I and the Father are One', is declared in our 
tradition to have blasphemed."

I think this really gets at the heart of the difference between theism and 
the sort of mysticism we find in the MOQ. Campbell is saying that theism, 
our theology, does everything from the conventional point of view whereas 
the mystics are talking about another level of consciousness beyond logic 
and all that. The idea here is that religious myths and ideas refer to a 
transcendent form of consciousness rather than a supernatural entity. The 
idea here is not just that we shouldn't believe in this creator God, but 
also that reading religion as if it refers to such a thing will cause a 
person to miss the actual meaning. Basically, theism is a misreading of 
myth. It takes myth literally and thereby misconstrues it. Sadly, millions 
and millions are quite happy with this misunderstanding and do not see it as 
such.

If you're sincerely interested in this topic you might enjoy my conference 
paper at robertpirsig.org.
Its called "Fun with Blasphemy" but its not really much fun.

Thanks.

_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to 
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement