[MD] Back in SOM

[Andre Broersen]

dmb says:
As part of my counter argument, I'm saying that the subject-object
distinction is older than the intellect and that intellect inherited it from
the older level, the mythos.

And you quote Pirsig (ZMM p 344);
"Thus, in cultures whose ancestry includes ancient Greece, one invariably
finds a strong subject-object differentiation because the grammar of the old
Greek mythos presumed a sharp natural division of subjects and predicates.
In cultures such as the Chinese, where subject-predicate relationships are
not rigidly defined by grammar, one finds a corresponding absence of rigid
subject-object philosophy." (ZAMM, chapter 28).

Andre:

Hi David, I am listening at the moment to Philip Glass' 'Satyagraha' . What
you are quoting here is revealing to me. I am/was convinced that Pirsig said
the opposite somewhere ..something like...before Homer, 'when the
subject/object distinction did not exist'...or something along those
lines...must look it up, go through both ZMM and Lila.
If I find no contradiction to this statement my understanding of the MoQ
will make a paradigm shift. But questions and clarifications will
follow...  Ahh, shit, oh well, 'such is life', as Ned Kelly said before they
dropped him (with a rope around his neck).
Thanks David!

Regards Andre