[MD] The Quest for Quality

[MarshaV]

At 12:59 PM 9/15/2008, you wrote:
>Hi Marsha --
>
>Responding to my critique of Pirsig's metaphysics (or its absence), you asked:
>
>>In an existence where everything is interrelated and ever-changing 
>>which direction would a first cause come from?  It looks to me like 
>>it would come from these collections of patterns called self, egos.
>
>And I've said before, "first" and "last" are intellectual precepts 
>of causality that frame one's experience.  From a metaphysical 
>perspective, all is One, and there is no sequence of events.  When 
>we speak causally, it is always in reference to sequential existence 
>(i.e., SOM).  So, when I said that Pirsig "cannot account for the 
>cause of experiential reality",
>I meant "cause" in the evolutionary way that we intellectualize 
>reality, which translates to "source" in the metaphysical 
>sense.  Understanding existence metaphysically is not a matter of 
>knowing "'which came first" but, rather, how it is derived from the 
>primary source.  There is only one metaphysical cause -- the first 
>or primary -- and it is constant..
>
>"Ego" is a psychological term relating to one's self-esteem or 
>motivational drive.  "Self" (or "proprietary awareness") is the more 
>appropriate term in the epistemological context of your 
>question.  And since being-aware equates to one's experience of the 
>world, subjectivity and objectivity arise concurrently.  One does 
>not precede the other, but (as with all differentiation) both are 
>"caused" by the sensibility/otherness dichotomy. Creation is not a 
>series of events ("patterns"?) from alpha to omega, but the 
>negational mode of Essence.  From the human perspective, however, it 
>is the ongoing process intellectualized as "evolution".
>
>Just as Pirsigians look at reality as a patterned distribution of 
>Quality, I see reality as a  finite differentiation of Essence.

The patterned distribution of static quality or Quality?  Static 
quality is definition.  Quality is beyond definition,  at least that 
is my understanding.  The terms 'primary' and 'first cause' both are 
definition making them static.  It seems to me that you are trying to 
reify Quality.

Interrelated causes and multiple conditions.  How can these be tracked?

While I think there is something in your theory that explains, to 
some extent, the conceptualization process, most of it makes no sense 
to me.  Thanks for the response, but the reification of Quality is a no-no.

Marsha





.
.

Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.