[MD] What is metaphysics to you?

[skutvik at online.no]

Ron, Cris, All.

On 3 Mars:

Ron had said:
> > The DQ/SQ divide is the intellectual/reality divide. Pirsig says
> > killintellectual patterns and morality is served. Reality is
> > realizedMore fully. Reality being patterns of Quality. Intellectualize
> > all youWant but doing so buries you deeper in SOM.
 
Bo:
Ron has expressed some agreement with my entries on this 
thread, but  I've grown a bit wary, no sooner has a reasonable 
post arrived from Ron before another "kills" the first and his 
above is an example. "The DQ/SQ divide ...etc."  possibly means 
that (he sees) the MOQ as a 4th. level pattern which it isn't: The 
4th level is a MOQ pattern and according to the container logic a 
smaller such can't contain the bigger, but who needs logic on this 
forum?  

Pirsig's on "killing intellectual patterns" means that intellect's S/O 
is what one must free oneself from before the MOQ's moral 
universe can be reached. That intellectualizing only brings one 
deeper into SOM is correct enough, but in Ron's view this means 
that the MOQ is intellect and must be transcended to reach 
Nirvana.   

--------------------

 Chris:
> This is simply not right at all - I feel. What you are talking about
> is Zen. Not the MOQ. Furthermore, this, I fear, is exactly the kind of
> talk that will kill the MOQ. 

Agreement this far:

> The MOQ is a theory - it isn’t the Dynamic Quality it talks about as
> well we all know, and it can never be. The DQ/SQ divide brings about a
> new way of interpreting the world - but that’s what we do with the MOQ
> - we interpret. Even the WORDS Dynamic Quality brings us away from it.

The notion of a Quality beyond  the MOQ brings on an 
Quality/DQ//SQ "metaphysics" and if Quality is to be kept outside 
THIS one another QUALITY/Quality//DQ///SQ emerges. Give up 
the idea of a Quality outside the MOQ, the two are identical. Also 
the idea of words as inferior is untenable. Language is the sea we 
swim in. 

> But it is still better than the SOM. That’s why we fight for it. If
> anyone here wishes to “save Quality from intellectualizing” I suggest
> you try Zen out. 

Well, although MOQ metaphysically is what contains the static 
intellectual level, there is some level-like relationship between the 
two. LILA accuses intellect of having forgotten its social roots, but 
the same charge can be directed against the moqists who claim 
that intellectualizing is the great sin. Here I think we agree Chris.  

It has worked quite well for the last 1400 years or so
> - but please don’t talk about it, don’t try to put names on it, and
> DON’T confuse it with the MOQ. 

> The MOQ is a theory, one that may bring about Better Days for mankind
> - but that makes it something. Static. Not DQ. Not God. Not Zen. but a
> Good theory. 

Again intellect's S/O roots shows - in this case of MOQ as a mere 
theory - but from the MOQ we see beyond intellect, to levels 
before the "reality as a theory" divide, chiefly the social level 
when human beings didn't have an inkling of their existence  
being a theory or a mythology or any other of intellect's "logies".     

Bo.