[MD] Science and the MOQ
pholden at davtv.com
pholden at davtv.com
Fri Apr 18 15:45:56 PDT 2008
Quoting Ron Kulp <RKulp at ebwalshinc.com>:
> Excellent .
Yes, excellent. I wonder if Bo concurs?
Platt
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Arlo
> Bensinger
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 3:07 PM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] Science and the MOQ
>
> Hi Ian,
>
> No, I don't think we disagree. I personally like
> strange loops and recursions, my point I suppose
> was that we have to accept this circularity and
> its limitations (and benefits) when we start to
> define something according to itself.
>
> There are certainly, as Ron points out,
> "intellectual patterns" we talk about here that
> are descriptions of the MOQ. But a metaphysics
> (any metaphysics, I would say) is more of an
> orientation, a "Way", the active construction of
> the system in the first place. SOM runs into the
> same self-referential question, is SOM-itself a
> "subject" or an "object"? I'd say "neither", but
> a way of framing the world INTO subjects and objects.
>
> You see the "problem", of course. Any system that
> "divides" the cosmos can't be contained within
> any of its divisions. By definition, it is above those divisions.
>
> Pirsig mentions this in ZMM. "Quality is the
> continuing stimulus which our environment puts
> upon us to create the world in which we live. All
> of it. Every last bit of it. ... Now, to take
> that which has caused us to create the world, and
> include it within the world we have created, is
> clearly impossible. That is why Quality cannot be
> defined. If we do define it we are defining
> something less than Quality itself." (ZMM)
>
> I'm obviously on a "verb" kick here, and its not
> entirely Ulysses S. Grant that is to blame,
> although that quote sums up a lot of what I think
> in very few words. Pirsig, by the way, also
> supports this. "Quality is not a thing. It is an event." (ZMM)
>
> In Pirsig's talk with John on the existence of
> ghosts for Indians, he says, "Those Indians and
> medieval men were just as intelligent as we are,
> but the context in which they thought was completely different." (ZMM)
>
> And that captures (I think) what I've said. The
> MOQ is "the context in which we think".
>
> It is a Way. A Weltanschauung (in the untranslated German sense).
>
> And let me be clear, I don't think this is just
> Pirsig's MOQ, but applies to the nature of all
> metaphysical inquiries. Pirsig says as much in
> LILA. "There already is a metaphysics of Quality.
> A subject-object metaphysics is in fact a
> metaphysics in which the first division of
> Quality - the first slice of undivided experience
> - is into subjects and objects." In this sense,
> I'd argue, "metaphysics of Quality" is redundant.
> There is Quality. And there are Metaphysical
> descriptions of that Quality. We more or less
> look past this redundancy due to Pirsig's
> particular use of the word "Quality", and maybe that's part of the
> confusion.
>
> So we start with an undefinable Quality, that is
> an "event" not a "thing", that is approachable
> always only through allegory and analogy, our
> "way" of dividing Quality becomes the "context in
> which we think", our Way of Being (or maybe
> Metaphysics with a capital "M", but this is
> active not descriptive). And then attempts to
> describe this context form the intellectual
> patterns we refer to as a metaphysics - which
> then kicks off the self-referential recursions
> since these are descriptions can never contain that which they describe.
>
> Make sense? (If so, you may be alone. :-))
>
> Arlo
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
More information about the Moq_Discuss
mailing list