[MD] Marsha's (s)OL

markhsmit markhsmit at aol.com
Wed Oct 14 21:06:35 PDT 2009


OK,
so I saw a few of my favorites involved here, thought I'd read through the thoughts
about knowledge.  Right now I am caught up in Wittgenstein, since I like his
approach, especially in Tractatus.  It's full of spins and dilemmas and tautologies, and
trying to get beneath tautologies.  According to this dude, everything that is expressed 
in factual discourse is based on real things, one just has to dig deep enough.  He
tried to be critical of philosophy in the same way as Kant, but did it through an
analysis of language.

In his subsequent major publication Wittgenstein tried to repudiate much of what
he says in Tractatus.  This doesn't make either one wrong.  If Pirsig were suddenly
to state that Quality is something completely different, that wouldn't mean that it was.

By defining the limits of language, Wittgenstein tried to show the limits of philosophy.
It is interesting that logic operates mainly on negation (Ham, you there?).  For each
logical statement, one negates all other possibilities.  Saying something is an object
is equivalent to saying it is not another object (or not a not-object).  It would seem that
a logical argument is filtering out all other possibilities, which is why I have stated in
a previous post, that the intellect is simply filtering out what is there. 

I would hazard to say that most of what we experience is un-patterned (to use the
phrase of this post).  It becomes patterned when we try to communicate it to
others or to ourselves.  By patterning it, we simplify it through negation.

You see Ham I like some of your stuff.  Some of its seems tautological to me,
and some of it is just a different way of saying what others say.  But it's
pretty neat to read.

Cheers,
Willblake2

On Oct 14, 2009, at 10:13:13 AM, "John Carl" <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
From:   "John Carl" <ridgecoyote at gmail.com>
Subject:    Re: [MD] Marsha's (s)OL
Date:   October 14, 2009 10:13:13 AM PDT
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Ok, I'm not speedy and quick, but slowly I get there. It's head-snappingly
complicated to wrap one's brain around objectification vs.
conceptualization...

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:00 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

> Steve,
>
> I am not extending the idea of "object" to include all sorts of patterns.
> Objectification is a process: "Objectification is the process by which an
> abstract concept is treated as if it is a concrete thing or physical
> object.
>


Ok, so if I was treating an abstract concept AS an abstract concept and NOT
as a concrete thing or a physical object, then I'm not guilty of
objectifying or reifying, right? Abstract concepts are intellectually
created and manipulated and "wrong" only when given false physicality.


In this sense the term is synonym to reification." (Wikipedia) There are no
> independent objects, things-in-themselves, in the MoQ. I have never said I
> supported Bo's SOL, I do agree with Bo that the Intellectual Level is the
> subject/object level. I agree with Bo that there should be a Quality Level
> above the Intellectual Level that represents unpatterned experience (DQ)
> and
> patterned experience (sq (static patterns of value)).
>


And in my quest for knowledge, I ask, What does unpatterned experience look
like? How do you define it?

It almost seems to me a phlogoston-like entity created for the logical
necessity of "patterned experience"... So you've got some "thing" to pattern
things out of.

I've come to think of DQ as a "patterning force" which puts the necessary
positive spin on the world which makes it go 'round. Love makes the world
go 'round. If Quality generates "all of it, every single bit", then none of
reality is unpatterned. You just haven't gotten 'round to patterning it
yet.

See how I am? It's why for me its simpler just to say, Reality is
Experience.
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/





More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list