[MD] When is a pattern not static?

[David M]

Hi DMB

Interestingly along these lines Heidegger talks about this he calls it the 
Ek-statik or ecstatic!

http://books.google.com/books?id=kd9txXmuMXkC&pg=PA229&lpg=PA229&dq=ekstatik%2Bheidegger&source=web&ots=dKE7MBOxP7&sig=IP1a56pHmzC7lzpCdFRN2f5oWKI

David M



>
> dmb says:
> It might help to look at the difference between Ham's unchanging 
> foundation and Steve's unfiltered experience. I think Ham's confusion is a 
> consequence of trying to understand Dynamic Quality as some kind of 
> foundational reality, as something that exists on its own apart from 
> experience, as if DQ were a simple substitute for SOM's objective reality 
> or Kant's things-in-themselves. But in the MOQ, experience IS reality and 
> the terms "static" and "dynamic" both characterize experience. William 
> James also used these terms to characterize experience. As he put it, 
> experience is like the movements of a bird, full of flights and perchings. 
> Dewey's work in art and aesthetics gets at this idea pretty well too. All 
> three of these guys (Pirsig, James and Dewey) are radical empiricists and 
> they're all looking closely and critically at SOM. It's no good trying to 
> understand static and dynamic without first understanding that.
>
> Dewey's distinction between recognition and perception might be helpful 
> here. For Dewey, "recognition" is something like static quality and 
> "perception" is dynamic. "The difference between the two is immense", he 
> says in his ART AS EXPERIENCE. "Recognition is perception arrested before 
> it has a chance to develop freely." "In recognition we fall back as upon a 
> stereotype, upon some previously formed scheme. Some detail or arrangement 
> of details serves as cue for bare identification. It suffices in 
> recognition to apply this bare outline as a stencil to the present 
> object". "Bare recognition is satisfied when a proper tag or label is 
> attached, 'proper' signifying one that serves a purpose outside the act of 
> recognition - as a salesman identifies wares by a sample." Sadly, says 
> Dewey, these "non-esthetic" kinds of experience are so common and 
> pervasive "that unconsciously they come to be taken as norms of all 
> experience. Then, when the esthetic appears, it so sharply contrasts wi
> th the picture that has been formed of experience, that it is impossible 
> to combine its special qualities with the features of the picture and the 
> esthetic is given an outside place and status."
>
> Its worth pointing out that for Dewey the aesthetic experience is not 
> confined to the fine arts. He talks about the aesthetic experience of a 
> thinker and a moral actor, for example. Just as in the MOQ, any kind of 
> experience could count as dynamic - hearing a new song, formulating a 
> hypothesis, fixing a bike or getting your life turned upside down by a 
> storm. In this case it refers to a high degree of engagement, a heightened 
> sensitivity to whatever is being experienced. When "perception replaces 
> bare recognition ...consciousness becomes fresh and alive". Dewey even 
> uses words like "care" and "love" to characterize the flavor and intensity 
> of involvement that this entails. And interestingly, he says that the 
> artist is guided by unifying "quality" that is neither capricious nor 
> routine. The artist or thinker selects and shapes her material through the 
> entire process on the basis this quality, by "whatever carries the idea 
> forward". In fact, he says, this level of engagement is
>  always felt as "emotional and guided by purpose". This feeling is so 
> inherent and integral to the aesthetic experience, says Dewey, that "there 
> is, therefore, no such thing in perception as seeing or hearing PLUS 
> emotion". He's careful to spell out that this is not "emotion" in the 
> conventional sense. I think he's talking about what Pirsig would call 
> "quality" or "value". As Dewey points out, the dynamic has given it "an 
> outside place and status". So we hardly know what to call it or how to 
> talk about it. But these guys put it at the center of things, despite our 
> culture's blind spot to it.
>
> Thanks,
> dmb
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live.
> http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008
> 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/
>