[MD] subject/object: pragmatism

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Spirits (SA)
 
On Nov. 23 you said:

> Bo, if I finally have figured out what your saying, then blow me down! 
> When you say 'moq' could I instead say 'quality' or 'dynamic quality'? 
> I'll wait for your answer before I conclude if I have finally reached
> the point where I understand you. 

When I say MOQ I mean "Quality Reality" because the opening 
postulate is  "Quality is Reality". This is a bit cumbersome, hence 
MOQ which has replaced the SOM as reality.

>      [SA previously]
> > > Is it pure experience/direct experience? 
 
>      [Bo] 
> > Of course. We know from ZAMM that Phaedrus reached
> > the 
> > insight that some pure - direct - experience
> > preceded (what he 
> > called)  "intellect" (much like Poincare's "beauty"
> > and James' 
> > "aesthetic continuum") this was what later became
> > Dynamic 
> > Quality so DQ=pure experience=direct experience.

You found this making sense, but then you ought to agree with my 
SOL (intellect=S/O) because - as said - ZAMM's first notion was that of 
a "pre-intellectual/intellectual" reality in contrast to the reigning 
"subject/object" one. The pre-intellectual something (that he called 
Quality) spawns Intellect (which is the S/O dichotomy) thus it's plain 
that Phaedrus of ZAMM saw intellect=S/O. Why Pirsig of LILA 
changed this is a mystery.


Bo