[MD] Empirical and Historical

[Ham Priday]

Marsha --


> I do not see a contradiction.  Is it any different than saying
> there is Dynamic Quality and static patterns of value, or
> there is the undifferentiated and projection?

It's not different in the sense that patterns are static, except that 
patterns are twice removed from Quality (Value).  Unlike experience, which 
IS dynamic, patterns are static intellectual constructions that represent 
the symmetry or repeated aspects of nature.  A geometric figure, the human 
form, a numeric series, iambic pentameter, the changing of the seasons, 
space/time, life and death, cause-and-effect, are patterns.

Patterns are really conceptual ideas (precepts) synthesized from experience. 
We don't directly experience patterns, we "intellectualize" them.  Without 
intellect experience would be a constant stream of meaningless, unrelated 
sensory data.  It is the human intellect that integrates this dynamic stream 
into identifiable objects and events, thus making order out of chaos.

Epistemology, as I understand it, is a threefold process involving 
Sensibility, Differentiation, and Conceptualization.

Sensibility is the primary subjective realization of essential Value.  (This 
is what Pirsig incorrectly called "pre-intellectual experience".)  It is 
subjective because it relates to otherness, as derived from the self/other 
dichotomy.  We become aware of Value by differentiating it into its sensory 
components: light, color, taste, shape, pressure, texture, smell, pain, 
pleasure, motion, etc.  We (experientially) conceptualize these valuistic 
attributes as particular phenomena by intellecting them as either subjective 
or objective, framing them in space and time, evaluating them relative to 
previous experience, and apprehending the final product as our existential 
(physical) reality.

The epistemological process itself is non-sequential in that all three 
phases operate simultaneously.  That the result of this process is universal 
(except for differences of individual perspective and sensibility) is 
ensured by the fact that all value is derived from a unitary Essence.

This is not easy to explain in a single post, but I felt you needed 
additional details in order to fairly compare my epistemology with that of 
the MoQ.  Again, it isn't "how we say something" as much as what we mean 
when we say it.  I could have responded that there's no difference between 
what you and I are saying, but without a suitable explanation it's like a 
politician's promises. We don't know for sure until we fill out the tax 
forms.

Thanks for your interest, Marsha.

Regards,
Ham