[MD] Matt and DMB disagree?

[david buchanan]

Matt said to dmb:
Naaah, I still don't think you're right.  I've never attacked mysticism, per 
se.  I do, however, attack certain uses of language, certain metaphors.  For 
instance, the concept of _maya_.  I can't see how that survives.

dmb says:
I think its not a matter of survival but of translation. In the case of 
mysticism, the question is whether or not it makes sense to apply Rorty's 
criticisms to it or not. Apparently, you still don't see this point. The 
concept of the maya is a little fresher and just as good, I think. You know 
how Rorty says its "text all the way down"? I think that when we translate 
that concept into the MOQ territory, Rorty's text is the same as Pirsig's 
analogue upon analogues. And that, my friend, is the maya. The illusory 
nature of the maya is that our mediations are taken for reality itself. Its 
the most original and natural form of essentialism. Again, the problem is 
one of translation. If the unconstructed experience, the unmediated 
consciousness can't be rejected on the grounds that we can't have direct 
access to visual reality simply because they are two entirely different 
concepts. Thus the prohibition against occular metaphors can't rightly be 
applied as a critique of radical empiricism or mysticism or Zen, none of 
whom are making claims about objective reality and its normally concieved. 
They are talking about the absence of maya, not objectivity.

Matt said:
But the notion of "direct and immediate experience" does lay behind many of
>the problems I have with Pirsigians.  It's not just ocular metaphors that I
>think are a problem, I think spatial metaphors are a problem, too.  I think
>implying there is a distance between us and reality (which the MoQ seems to
>resurrect with its distinction between direct and indirect experience, DQ
>and static patterns) is a problem--reminicent of the subject/object
>distance.

dmb says:
Again, the MOQ's categories are badly translated here. The distinction 
between static and Dynamic is not a distinction between us and reality. I 
suspect Rorty simply doesn't go there.

I can see that you're not interested in grappling with my points in any 
specific way. If that's really your choice, I'll let it go. But you can 
understand why I might be a little frustrated at that, no? Won't you even 
acknowledge the distinction between the mystical and positivistic notions of 
unmediated experience? I'd really like to know if its just pride or genuine 
incomprehension. I mean, do you really not see it? I thought I'd made it 
clear enough that you could be specific in your reply, even if you still 
disagree.

Its cool if you'd rather whip up another essay. I just hope you tackle some 
of this stuff head on, which would also be my only complaint about the last 
one you did. I would have like to see you handle some of Hildebrand's 
complaints, for example. It looked to me like you were only pretending that 
he didn't delivery some pretty solid punches. Likewise, your reply here 
pretty much avoids any direct contact with my point. Just so you know, I 
feel cheated by that sort of thing. Who wouldn't?

dmb

_________________________________________________________________
The average US Credit Score is 675. The cost to see yours: $0 by Experian. 
http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=660600&bcd=EMAILFOOTERAVERAGE