[MD] extricating MOQ from SOM

[Heather Perella]

Hello Jaclyn Engele,


     [Jaclyn]
> On page 223 of ZMM (1984 paperback)  RP shows  two
> charts.  pre and post MoQ.  The MoQ chart shows
> sub(mind) and obj(matter) as  divisions of
> classic(intellectual reality).  Romantic
> quality(pre-intellectual reality) is a dead end and
> quality(reality) is at the top.  The classic
> subject/object branch is supposed to be the post
> game analysis of reality(quality) with a slight time
> delay.  The romantic branch is supposed to be the
> instantaneous experience of reality(quality).  Thing
> is, I can see how the subjective path could be
> either romantic or classical while at the same time
> the objective path could only be
> classical(analytical after the fact).  If reality
> exists in the present moment only(romantic pre
> intellectual) then the subject has access to reality
> and the objective perspective is a useful tool for
> analysis of that  event.  The only reason we ever
> thought that quality and reality were not synonymous
> was because of the dominance of the objective
> classical perspective.  Our western culture is
caught up in the SOM  > trap by being predominantly
objective to a fault.  ZMM seems
> to answer the SOM problem because it is primarily a
> problem we experience as objectivity taken to a
> fault more so than subjectivity taken to a fault. 
> Even within a SOM, subjectivity places value on
> instantaneous(romantic) reality and therefore the
> question of quality, regarding subjectivity, could
> be semantic.  


     I am hoping the more experienced discussors of
the MoQ will take up this line of questioning.  Is
this really what the MoQ has been trying to do all
along?  Shift the weight from an objectively heavy
culture to a more balanced SOM culture, thus, the MoQ
emphasizes quality or subjectivity to shift this
overload to a more balanced perspective?  When we
shift this overloaded cargo of objectivity to allow
for more subjectivity, if this is what the MoQ is
emphasizing, then our perspective must obviously
change, and this is the whole pigeonhole talk that
Pirsig mentions.  But first, is quality and
subjectivity a semantic point?

Thanks,
SA

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