[MD] Dualism and Eagleton's God Delusion

[skutvik at online.no]

DMB and All.

2 March you ended ended your GUT (great unification theory) thus: 

> But the point here is to illuminate the MOQ's basic structure, the
> static/dynamic split. This is a dualism, as any intellectual
> description MUST be, but notice that this split does NOT entail
> opposed forces or any kind of ontological gap. 

That the DQ/SQ is a dualism I agree to, but not an intellectual 
dualism because those invariably are S/O.  Again my perennial 
example. In (an intellectual) retrospect the myths of old were 
descriptions of experience as they perceived it, but in a MOQ 
retrospect they were "social descriptions", perhaps dualist in the 
mortal/immortal fashion, but not S/O. The latter only arrived with 
intellect when perception of experience became a subject making 
theoretical "descriptions" about an objective world.  

> Instead, two forms or
> kinds of the same reality with one kind basically being a subset of
> the other, a derivation of the other. I mean, this dualism has a unity
> built right into it.

Yes, SQ is a different "state" than DQ like ice is different from 
water yet water, but that does not make them one. The twain will 
meet no more than the subject and the object will in SOM. The 
goodness of  MOQ's dualism rests on its not isolating us - the 
subjects - from our world.

To split more hairs. SOM is Reality split subjective/objective, 
Pirsig says that Reality=Quality, thus SOM is really Subjective 
Quality/Objective Quality. In fact Pirsig says so somewhere (I'm 
searching) but a Q-SOM is indistinguishable from ordinary SOM. 
Thus Quality "prior to DQ/SQ" means nothing. The first "box" 
disappears after the split so there is no Quality that can be 
arbitrarily split BY INTELLECT. Intellect IS the S/O split!     

> Both aspects can be known from experience too, so
> that we don't have to speculate about a realm where possibilities
> reside or otherwise get lost in fictional abstractions. If the static
> world is built of analogy upon analogy, if it is a creation of
> imagination, then creativity is and always was the "condition of
> possibility", not the universe as a stage set for entities. The latter
> puts the cart before the horse, if you will.

"Experience" tend to be filtered through the current value filter. 
The Ancients experienced in accordance with their social value 
filter and we - until the MOQ - experienced through the S/O-
intellectual filter. By now we ought to slowly begin experiencing 
through the DQ/SQ filter, but instead you work overtime trying to 
adust the MOQ to intellect's SOM filter.        

> As far as I can tell, Aristotle has nothing to do with it.

He helped install the intellectual experience filter. 

IMO

Bo