[MD] Objectivism and the MOQ

[Micah]

Ham,

>"Objectivism maintains that existence exists independently of
consciousness,
>and that the mind's function is to grasp the identity of what exists.  This
>position, known as realism, or the primacy of existence, is opposed to
>idealism, or the primacy of consciousness, which holds that the objects of
>knowledge are dependent in some way on the knower-that reality is
>constituted by or relative to our own minds.

Ask yourself, how can anything be shown to exist independently of
consciousness. An Objectivist will know nothing can be shown to exist
independent of consciousness. There is a twist that Pirsig settled for me.
Reality exists independently with the presence of man. This is not a good
description, but I'm unable to put together a better one...yet. We are the
reality. Rand and Pirsig (in Lila) examine how man functions within reality.
Pirsig, in Zen, examines the nature of reality.

>"Objectivism subscribes to the thesis of empiricism: that sense perception
>is our basic form of contact with reality, and that all knowledge rests on
>perceptual evidence. The Objectivist viewpoint on perception, however, is
>unique in a number of respects. The most important is its rejection of the
>representationalist view that we perceive external objects indirectly,
>through the medium of images or representations internal to consciousness.
>The representationalist view, which dominated modern philosophy and is
still
>commonly accepted, arose from the fact that the appearance of an object is
>partly dependent on the nature and operations of our sensory systems.

The representationalist view has a contradiction. You must use your senses
to deny your senses.

>"Objectivism offers a radically new theory of perceptual appearances as
>forms in which we perceive objects directly."

We are all Objectivists, except the guys attempting to walk through walls,
and their failing actually makes them Objectivists also, they just won't
admit it. We all deal with reality objectively, reality is not suspendable
(look ma, a new word!). This can be too harsh for many, hence the denial of
the senses.


>1. What's the difference between Rand's division of consciousness and
>physical existence and the mind/matter duality rejected by the MoQ?

What division of consciousness? And the Quality event is the playing field
of mind and matter.

>2. Wouldn't Rand's "realism" (i.e., direct perception of objects) rule out
>Experience as a "mediator" of Quality (or Value) which is Pirsig's
>epistemology?

I need more detail in your question to respond. Develop the contradiction
you see more fully for me.

Thanks
Micah