[MD] Mindless Metaphysics

[David M]

Gav

Try this. Experience is all subjective, or subjectivity is the wholeness of
experience. You cannot take the subject out of experience. SOM tries
to divide experience and identify non-subject aspects.This is impossible
because it is all experience. We can call this quality instead. Now
quality can be shown to contain dynamic/new/emergent non-patterned
aspects that's DQ, and the patterned SQ parts of experience is
what SOM calls objects in the main, but sometimes subject-ive if
the patterns are not describable in terms of matter.

MOQ says SOM is a mess, better to just see the patterns
and the dynamic aspects of experience and stop trying to
divide the patterns into subjective and objective ones as
this is a confused distinction. And it's all quality-experience,
none of it can be called non-quality-experience, so what use is
the SOM distinction?

David M



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "david buchanan" <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 6:19 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Mindless Metaphysics



Gav said:
i can't see it dave. i don't see how intellect can exist without subjects 
thinking of objects. SOM was the evolutionary leap that enabled intellect. 
intellect can't exist outside of this split: the split is fundamental. i 
don't see how calling the split dynamic/static changes anything. it is still 
a split.

dave says:
Think about that analytic knife. That's intellect. It can slice up reality 
in any number of ways. Subjects and objects are just one way to divide 
experience. Yes, intellect splits experience or reality. It makes 
distinctions and definitions but there is no reason to think there is only 
one way to do this. James's statement that pure experience is "only 
virtually classifiable" as subject or object makes this same claim. Like 
Pirsig, he's saying subjects and objects are concepts rather than reality 
itself. Intellect can't exist outside of the cutting, but there's more than 
one way to slice it. And I think its very compelling that they both think 
the static/dynamic distinction is better as a first cut.

Gav said:
reality is pre-conceptual. MOQ is conceptual and therefore is an object of 
consideration for thinking subjects. metaphysics are intellectual 
frameworks.  the MOQ accomodates SOM within a broader context, incorporating 
a mystic, dynamic absolute that underpins and pervades all 'things'.

dave says:
Except for the part about the MOQ being an object for a subject, I'm with 
you here. The MOQ is an intellectual framework, one that knows that such 
frameworks are only a menu and not the food, one that is drawn with the 
understanding of the limits of intellect, one that makes room for the 
pre-intellectual reality it cuts up.

We gotta hang out. I miss you.


_________________________________________________________________
Make distant family not so distant with Windows Vista® + Windows Live™.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/digitallife/keepintouch.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC_VideoChat_distantfamily_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/