[MD] extricating MOQ from SOM

[Case]

Jim,

The split you are describing below is, as you know, discussed at length in
ZMM in terms of the romantic/classic split. Carl Jung also had quite a bit
to say about it in terms of the Thinking and Feeling personality types and
if you don't mind having things dumbed down for you there is John Gray and
Men are From Mars Women, Got No... wait, that's another thread.

But if you are asking how does this kind of thinking (MoQ) effect what one
does rather than how one thinks, hopefully you develop a sense of humor and
thick skin. You are going to need them. Most every one around is probably
thinking in pretty rigid terms. Things are right or wrong, either because
that's what they feel or that's what they think. Being able to see things
from multiple perspectives is not going to make you popular. 

The more you think about things the more out of step with everyone else you
become. If you can't make superficial conversation and talk about sports
life can be pretty lonely.

Oh well, I sure hope I am wrong.

Case


> [Case]
> I thought Pirsig's said that the problem arrises from regarding SOM as THE
> fundamental metaphysical distinction...

I am conscious of that and yet at the same time I see things slightly 
different.  The problem I see is that the people who make this mistake are 
the ones who objectify to a fault. They  view quality(reality) as residing 
in either subject or object.   This is the story we're all familiar with. 
However, those who are predominantly subjective in their outlook (for 
example: my wife, artists, the professional classical musicians that I have 
to deal with in my line of work every day) don't make the same mistake.  If 
they subjectify the world to a fault they end up making a different mistake 
but through it all they somehow still recognize quality as supreme.   The 
mistake they make is that they refuse to analyze and learn(paralysis by 
analysis is a term I hear at work all the time).  This is why talking to 
them about a Metaphysics of Quality goes in one ear and out the other.  It's

just not a problem they can relate to.  You see what I'm saying?

Through my observations I have come to wonder if, in practical terms, 
finding the right 'balance' between S&O in one's life is compatible in 
concept with the MoQ.  Finding harmony.   "Quality(reality) ...is the event 
at which the subject becomes aware of the object"ZMM pg.215

I also wonder if S&O are tools to use to gain access to 
reality/truth/quality.  If, in doing that, I am recognizing the superior 
positioning of reality/truth/quality to a subordinate S&O, then I think that

is compatible with MoQ.  That is very pragmatic.  That is something I can 
use in everyday life.  I think the subjective people might just find that 
useful as well.


Jim Engele

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/