[MD] The relativity of the MoQ

[fernandocarlosfarah at mls.com.br]

  I am sorry.

   ----- Mensagem de hampday1 at verizon.net ---------
    Data: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 02:16:49 -0500
    De: Ham Priday <hampday1 at verizon.net>
Endereço para Resposta (Reply-To): moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Assunto: Re: [MD] The relativity of the MoQ
      Para: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org

>
> Reconciling Steve and Platt --
>
> On 30 Aug. at 11:34 AM, Platt wrote:
>
>
>> For me Quality, beauty is there all the time, all around us,  in
the
>> trees, the earth, the sky, the emptiness of space. It is there  
>> waiting for us to rejoin it. At death it is as if we move from
>> one side of our senses to the other, from the highly filtered,
>> highly processed world inside the brain to the true unbounded
>> universe where subjective and objective coalesce.  We step out of 
>> the dense fog of introverted human perception
>> to  the clear air of reality. Where beauty is we will be.
>
> At 12:06 PM Steve responded:
>
>> If Quality=reality=experience then we don't need to be concerned
>> with any "dense fog of introverted human perception" that stands
>> between us and the world as it really is. The MOQ perspective
>> as I understand it makes it impossible to imagine being out of
>> touch with reality since experience IS reality, so we never need
>> to worry about trying to get back in touch with it after death.
>> On the other hand, Pirsig wrote bits about the possibility of
>> "taking off the cultural glasses" that contradict this view, but I

>> think such passages are a step backward from the Quality
>> postulate to a subject-object, appearance-reality picture where
>> taking off the glasses as a philosophical goal makes sense.
>
> Here are two elegantly articulated statements that seem to present 
> opposing views of "the world as it really is".  But are they really

> in opposition, or simply descriptions of two different reality perspectives?
>
> Platt is talking about aesthetic value that pervades the universe, 
> and how we (as sentient subjects) seek to identify with it.  He 
> speaks of "beauty" as an eternal 'Quality' that we perceive 
> tangentially "from one side of our senses" but which is "waiting
for
> us to rejoin it".  If Platt's description of subjective sensibility

> is a "foggy" suggestion of our "estrangement" from reality, the fog

> is dispelled in the next sentence where he speaks of death moving
us
> (the "world inside the brain") "...to the true unbounded universe 
> where subjective and objective coalesce."  In fact, this is one of 
> the few instances where Platt has alluded to metaphysical reality.
>
> Steve, on the other hand, is not talking about "ultimate reality"
or
> esthetic appreciation but, rather, experiential existence.  
> Experience, for Steve, is "reality as it really is".  "Since 
> experience IS reality," he insists; "we never need to worry about 
> trying to get back in touch with it after death."  What he says is 
> true insofar as we are subjectively "in touch with" reality through

> our experience of its objective values.  But he is confused by 
> Pirsig's "cultural glasses" that "contradict this view" and,
frankly,
> so am I.  Whether we wear such glasses or not, existence is "a 
> subject-object, appearance-reality picture", whereas reality itself

> is not. And I, for one, have a problem with the equation
"Experience
> = Reality".
>
> I would submit that there is a world of difference (literally) 
> between being "in touch with" reality, valuistically, as an
observer
> "on the fringe" and being unified with it.  Platt has dared to 
> speculate that the cessation of life may be a return to Oneness.  
> While this of course is a spiritualistic concept shunned by the 
> MoQists, it has metaphysical validity in Essentialism.  For if the 
> essence of man is value-sensibility, as I maintain, there is no 
> logical principle or law of nature whereby Essence can be lost.  
> Indeed, it would seem that the created "agent of value" is 
> inextricably linked with its uncreated Source.
>
> Thanks, gentlemen, for your perceptive worldviews.
>
> Essentially yours,
> Ham
>
> 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/
>

----- Final da mensagem de hampday1 at verizon.net -----