[MD] SOM - do we need it?

[Peter Corteen]

Hi David,

I have not heard of a connection between Whitehead and F.M.Alexander. I did
a google search and came up with:
 'A. N. Whitehead and Samuel Alexander were two of the few British
philosophers who produced comprehensive metaphysical systems in the early
part of this century'.

But that is not the same Alexander.

F.M.Alexander gave lessons in physical re-education to John Dewey over a
period of many years (http://www.alexandertechnique.com/articles/dewey/).

-Peter

2008/8/6 David M <davidint at blueyonder.co.uk>

> Hi Peter
>
> And Alexander connects to Whitehead who connects to Dewey and
> Heidegger who connects to Derrida and it might all just start to come
> together in something that transcends Enlightenment thinking.
>
> DM
>
>
>
>  Hi Gav,
>>
>> I'd not heard of Merleau-Ponty before; I think there is a strong
>> connection
>> here with the work of F.M.Alexander and then a reinforcing tie back with
>> Alexander's influence on Dewey. Alexander's was a very practical approach
>> to
>> the use of the self especially with regard to postural habit. Critically,
>> the technique he developed is based absolutely on none-SOM principles in
>> his
>> treatment of the self as a psycho-physical organism where the practitioner
>> attempts to constantly re-establish sensory contact with the body and
>> thereby lives more in the moment.
>>
>> Also, the practice of self-remembering (re-membering: again deliberate
>> re-establishment of sensory contact with the body while working) is,
>> without
>> question, the most useful thing I took away from my time in Gurdjieff
>> groups.
>>
>> -Peter
>>
>> 2008/7/29 gav <gav_gc at yahoo.com.au>
>>
>>  Pirsig's mission is to replace SOM with MOQ, so why are many on this list
>>> reluctant to let SOM go?
>>>
>>> the answer, i believe, is that SOM is so entrenched in our collective
>>> psyche that it is very difficult to conceive of it being superceded. if
>>> this
>>> supercession were not difficult then pirsig needn't have spent decades
>>> thinking through the problem. pirsig is not the first philosopher to
>>> recognise the subject/object schism...indeed this profound dilemma has
>>> been
>>> haunting philosophy for centuries. to move beyond SOM requires radical
>>> surgery.
>>>
>>> the intellectual cannot be solely SOM: the MOQ is an idea and it is not
>>> SOM.
>>>
>>> to let go of SOM is to let go of the idea of dualism, of solipsism, of
>>> the
>>> possibility of pure objectivity. instead the subjective becomes partnered
>>> with the intersubjective (to follow husserl and merleau-ponty). the
>>> intersubjective world - the previously 'objective' world - is the world
>>> of
>>> phenomenal consensus.
>>>
>>> with the copernican re-ordering of the universe a schism was created: the
>>> everyday world of our perceptions was usurped by the idea of the 'real'
>>> order of a heliocentric universe. the locus is not with our own
>>> body-subject
>>> and its being-in-the-world, but with an abstract point of reference. this
>>> abstract realm is only accessible by the intellect. in other words reason
>>> becomes the sole method of recognising truth - plato's world of forms,
>>> christian heaven, and the pre-eminence of (SOM) intellect all presuppose
>>> and
>>> perpetuate this abstract-phenomenal dichotomy with precedence given to
>>> the
>>> abstract. in other words the abstract becomes real and the phenomenal
>>> becomes epiphenomenal: this is baudrillard's 'simulacrum' or the
>>> spectacular
>>> reality of the situationists. SOM is part of this worldview and it can't
>>> be
>>> separated from it. to try and hang on to SOM is to miss the point of
>>> pirsig's work.
>>>
>>> the copernican revolution enthroned the sun as the centre of things; this
>>> is a paternal standpoint. the earth is the goddess, the sun is god and
>>> the
>>> human is supposed to be the dynamic union of the two. since copernicus
>>> the
>>> earth has become merely an object and only god - the male aspect of
>>> divinity
>>> - is recognised.
>>>
>>> we perceive from earth. our experiential locus is the body-subject - this
>>> is the experiential centre of the universe (god is an intelligible sphere
>>> whose centre is everywhere and circumference nowhere - cusa). only from
>>> this
>>> point of view can we esemplastically reconcile the realms of heaven and
>>> earth into a dynamic unity.
>>>
>>> if we need more proof of the need for SOM to be superceded we need only
>>> look to phenomenology and existentialism. the psychopathological effects
>>> of
>>> SOM were recognised and predicted by husserl and others (most famously
>>> dostoevsky). SOM is the 'disensoulment' of the earth - of ourselves. it
>>> is
>>> the mechanisation of life and human and it is this that is the meaning of
>>> the robot/AI myths - NOT the production of truly intelligent autonomous
>>> mechanical beings, but the production of mechanical beings from truly
>>> intelligent autonomous ones!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>> so i entreat one and all to stay true to the core of pirsig's work. if
>>> you
>>> think SOM is okay then you are very sorely mistaken and you should
>>> probably
>>> go back and read bob's books again...slowly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     Find a better answer, faster with the new Yahoo!7 Search.
>>> www.yahoo7.com.au/search
>>> 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/
>>
>>
>
> 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/
>