[MD] Does the MOQ invalidate Subjectivity?

[Steve Peterson]

Hi Gene, Ham,

Gene said:
>But how does
> the world perceive itself?
> 
> Maybe it's all just a bunch of subjects interacting.

That's pretty much how I interpret the MOQ. Reality
composed of value is like saying that reality is
composed of awareness. You have to be cafeful with
words like "awareness" or "consciousness" since they
imply a subject  being aware of an object, and
subjects and objects are secondary inferences in the
MOQ.

Imagining  the world as "subjects interacting" is a
little problematic for that reason, but it sounds
pretty consistent with Pirsig's idea of experienced
reality as patterns of value.

Related also is the idea of small self and Big Self in
Buddhism. To identify with small self is to identify
with a particular set of static patterns, while Big
Self is the pure awareness that is unchanging in its
perpetual "newness" i.e DQ.

As I understand Buddhism (which is probably not all
that well, and I welcome help), Nirvana is identifying
with this fundamental nature of the world instead of
static patterns (what might be called conditioned
awareness), and such an experience is thought to give
insight into the unity of the world as the many
(static patterns) are seen to be manifestations of the
One (DQ).

So as Arlo quoted, "I am he as you are he as you are
me and we are all together" from perspective of Big
Self.  So in Buddhist terms it's not such a far out
idea to say that the universe is composed of
awareness. Since Pirsig identifies Big Self or
Awareness with DQ and static patterns are
manifestations of DQ, then static patterns are also
awareness.

Regards,
Steve




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com