[MD] Pirsig's idea of the individual

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting Heather Perella <spiritualadirondack at yahoo.com>:

> Platt,
> 
>       What does 'independent' mean?
> 
> 
> SA

SA,

In this context -- different, distinct, particular, singular, unique, special. 

Platt

> 
> > >      [SA previously]
> > > > > Arlo, this quote below defines what individual
> > is,
> > > > > thank you.  A fictitious convenience as Pirsig
> > > > notes
> > > > > below.  Sure I say individual, he, she,
> > etc...,
> > > > and it
> > > > > is "...remembered that they're terms for
> > > > collections
> > > > > of patterns and not some independent primary
> > > > reality
> > > > > of their own."  Platt, why the hang-up?  What
> > are
> > > > you
> > > > > trying to hold onto so tightly?  Platt, this
> > quote
> > > > > defines individual, and then moves on to use
> > > > > individual as a convenient fiction.  I see
> > static
> > > > > patterns as fiction thus truth, thereby,
> > avoiding
> > > > the
> > > > > hang-up of believing static patterns are The
> > > > Truth,
> > > > > don't forget about dynamic quality.
> > > 
> > > 
> > >      [Platt] 
> > > > I  don't consider individuals such as yourself
> > to be
> > > > "fictitious conveniences."
> > > > I value you as an "independent reality" whose
> > > > individuality brings much 
> > > > high quality to my experience. I can imagine the
> > > > look on the faces of your
> > > > staff if you told them they were simply figments
> > of
> > > > your imagination. No. You
> > > > and they are as real as life and love and beauty
> > and
> > > > death. And that's The
> > > > Truth. :-)
> > > 
> > >      How can I be The Truth?  There is you, too,
> > as
> > > well as mountains and rivers.
> > 
> > I think you can be The Truth just as much as your
> > assertion that "There is 
> > you, too, as well as mountains and rivers" is the
> > Truth. There are many 
> > "The Truths." And that's "The Truth" :-)
> > 
> > >      As much as you like to say, "And Pirsig says
> > this
> > > so it must be the MoQ.", your veering from what
> > Pirsig
> > > says on this issue, which to completely Pirsig
> > would
> > > be mistake I'd admit.  
> > 
> > If this was such a big deal for Pirsig he would have
> > devoted  a chapter
> > or two on it in Lila. But you're right. Pirsig would
> > approve veering from 
> > what he says on an issue. He doesn't hold himself
> > out to be a guru who
> > has all the answers.   
> > 
> > >      How can I be an "independent reality"?  I
> > > co-exist with you, too, as well as mountains and
> > > rivers.
> > 
> > If you "co-exist," there must be something else to
> > exist with -- me, a 
> > mountain, a river, etc. A whole  consist of parts.
> > One is only known by 
> > the many. Both exist. Both are real. Like the song
> > says, "You can't have 
> > one without the other."  
> > 
> > >      Dq is sq.  The mountains are really mountains
> > and
> > > the rivers are really rivers.  I am really I, and
> > > staff are really staff.
> > 
> > You bet your life. :-). 
> > 
> >  >Yet, this stage of
> > > understanding commented upon by Dogen and Pirsig
> > is a
> > > pragmatic reality where we are part of web as
> > Chief
> > > Joseph of the Nez Perce mentioned.
> > 
> > I think it's more pragmatic to act on the assumption
> > that I better get out 
> > of the way of that independently real  truck bearing
> > down on independently 
> > real me. Don't you agree?
> > 
> > Platt



-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/