[MD] John Carl Critiques Pure Experience:INST01

[John Carl]

On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 11:59 PM, <skutvik at online.no> wrote:

> John. Marsha, All
>
>
>
> Who are you speaking to above about RMP "ripping into idealism"?
> Phaedrus of ZAMM did so (if it means reject idealism) in the same
> "sitting" as he rejected materialism  (the two horns dilemma)
>


My comment referred to RMP's commentary on Idealism as commented on by
Coppleston posted on Ant McWatt's website.

Speaking to?   I was "speaking" to MoQ Discuss.  The gist of my dialogue
here began with assering Roycean Absolute Idealism as more compatibel with
the MoQ than Jamesian Pragmatism.  I would have made more sense except I am
scatterbrained, which gets in the way of effective communication.  That's my
insane way of dealing with my truth, I guess.




>
> The other day (July 22) Marsha brought the exchange between Pirsig
> and Dan Glover about the disastrous 102 annotation where Dan
> correctly points to P's rejection of SOM's subjective "horn" (after having
> spent a long time rejecting the objective)
>
>    > DG:
>    > You mention philosophic idealism in Zen and the Art of
>    > Motorcycle Maintenance during your refutation of scientific
>    > materialism (Chapter 19) but you reject it as "too far fetched." Do
> you
>    > feel that's why so few people understand it?
>
>    > RMP:
>    > It seems outside "common sense," so most people don't believe it.
>    > But I believe it was the dominant school of philosophical thought in
>    > England during the Victorian period.
>
> See, Pirsig is no longer as tough on idealism (subjectivism) as P. of
> ZAMM was



Yes, in fact I saw him switch attitude 180 degrees in the short length of
this one paper.  He started out really ripping into Idealism wherever he
could and he concluded with....


It has really been a shock to see how close Bradley is to the MOQ. Both he
and the MOQ are expressing what Aldous Huxley called "The Perennial
Philosophy," which is perennial, I believe, because it happens to be true.
Bradley has given an excellent description of what the MOQ calls Dynamic
Quality and an excellent rational justification for its intellectual
acceptance.  It and the MOQ can be spliced together with no difficulty into
a broader explanation of the same thing.



> and this is the problem that the MOQ have been hampered
> by since LILA's publication. Pirsig has let go of the deadly grip that
> Phaedrus had on SOM by declaring SOM a Quality's fall-out. Now
> suddenly idealism is a way to understand the MOQ! Argh!!!



No, I wouldn't say that.  I'd say the MoQ and Idealism are both attempts to
understand reality, and comparing their paths builds a higher understanding
in a dynamically intellectual way.



> Why didn't he understand that letting subjectivism act as closer to
> MOQ was letting SOM in by the back door. But those who hadn't
> understood the first thing of the MOQ  was happy, here was the
> "handle" whereby it could be aligned with "mysticism". A place SOM is
> overjoyed to relegate all those who don't like its materialism. There they
> are safely inside the fold..


Mysticism is a  brand.  Quality is undefinable, but you know what it is.
 That "knowing" is an interesting idea in a empirically-oriented world
because one problem empiricism has is linking the empirical facts of another
to one's own "accredited knowledge".   The philosophical assertion that the
other has an undefinable but  knowable experience solves this problem in a
unique way.

So... would you term this "subjectivism" because it's centered on subjects?
 Or would you call it subjectivism because it aknowledges subjects?



>
>
> And Jeez, "common sense" isn't SOM's hallmark, it has for centuries
> produced paradoxes that flies in the face of common sense . It's the
> MOQ that reintroduces common sense, so something outside it is
> outside the MOQ
>
> Bodvar
>

Common sense is the lies the sane tell themselves in order to cope with
truth.  (Pardon me, I'm trying out a new aphorism I plucked from Ron this
morning and seeing how it fits.)


John



>
>
>
>
> 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/
>