[MD] What is metaphysics to you?

[skutvik at online.no]

On 6 Apr 2008 at 15:49, Matt Kundert wrote:

> My two definitions:

> 1) Metaphysics is the general framework, or understanding, or set of
> assumptions, that people unconsciously (with various degrees of
> self-consciousness) interpret, or see, or live in the world. As an
> activity, it is the attempt to make the unconscious self-conscious
> (this activity is also known in some circles as "philosophy").

Talking to Matt is a safe sport, no disturbing replies. However his 
definition (#1) is pretty good, only I can't get it basic enough. 
Even Pirsig's "..no-one living in an ordered universe can avoid 
metaphysics" should have omitted "ordered" because human 
beings invariably order existence - that's their hallmark. Thus 
even the old mythologies were  metaphysics in this extended 
sense.   

An aside): Because only human beings has entered the Q-social 
level and a mythology requires language I wonder if not language 
and the social level are intimately connected. A chicken & egg 
relationship. From now on I use that as my premises.        

It's said that the first registered burial rituals is a sign - not only of 
a notion of an existence beyond, but of an EXISTENCE at all, but 
as sure is it that early humankind didn't invent the beyond as a 
comfort against their fear of death, rather that the existence 
beyond was what confirmed an existence here. Anyone 
understand the the immensity of this point?       

As I see it, MOQ's message is that each static level is the 
creation of a reality different from the one before it and the social 
level was a shift from biology's non-existential existence (death 
no issue as an "idea") to one of eternal existence (death as a 
mere transition to another realm)  Thus when the 4th level 
emerged with its objective outlook that gave death a final "fall 
from the rim of existence" quality) social value attained a 
"paradise lost" quality for many.   

This I believe was behind Phaedrus' identifying the old Aretê with 
Value itself, and his hatred of SOM that destroyed it. In MOQ this 
is the social-intellectual transition and my above explains why 
intellect looks so "valueless" (to regard intellect this way is wrong 
but enough for now). I just wonder why Pirsig so patently refuses 
to compare ZAMM with the MOQ and so mysteriously downplays 
the SOM. 

Anyway. I also believe this to be behind other attempts to 
systematize the upheaval around this time in history  it, for 
instance Owen Barfield's "Participation Scheme" that fits 
uncannily with MOQ's social - intellectual stages and because 
Barfield postulates a "resumption of participation" fits with the 
MOQ itself, i.e. a return to the holistic "social" view ... although at 
a higher plane.   

> 2) Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy that attempts to display
> the basic, universal, ahistorical underpinnings of reality (this
> activity is also sometimes known in some circles as "Platonism," and
> in a few circles the acronymic "SOM").

This resembles Pirsig's about the MOQ as a mere theory about 
the "Quality Reality" that can be divided any way and still be 
good. Something I deeply disagree with.    

Bo