[MD] A larger system of understanding

[plattholden at gmail.com]

On 8 Jul 2010 at 19:35, Dan Glover wrote:

> Hello everyone
> 
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 11:21 AM,  <plattholden at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > At the risk of beating a dead horse and getting banned I offer the following
> > Pirsig quote as further evidence that including the MOQ in the intellectual
> > level doesn't make sense.
> >
> > "The Metaphysics of Quality resolves the relationship between intellect and
> > society, subject and object, mind and matter, by embedding all of them in a
> > larger system of understanding. Objects are inorganic and biological values;
> > subjects are social and intellectual values." (Lila, 24)
> >
> > Perhaps someone can explain, if the MOQ is a set of subjective intellectual
> > values how it can see itself as a set of subjective system of values --  the
> > problem an eye seeing itself.
> 
> Dan:
> If my eye looks in a mirror it sees my eye. This is a good metaphor to
> understand the solution to your problem, don't you think so, Platt?

[Platt]
Except Pirsig warned us that mirrors can distort reality. "But it was an 
assertion of the Metaphysics of Quality that there exists a reality beyond all 
these social mirrors. That he had explored. In fact there are two levels of 
reality beyond these mirrors: an intellectual reality and beyond that, a 
Dynamic reality." (Lila, 20) So no. I don't think a mirror is a good metaphor 
to solve the problem. . 

> >Platt:
> > For me the explanation is that the MOQ is a larger system of understanding
> > because unlike intellectual values, it admits a nonintellectual value, DQ,
> > leading to the conclusion that the essence of the MOQ is only understood from a
> > mystic, not an intellectual, perspective.
> 
> Dan:
> All terms are intellectual terms in the MOQ, even Dynamic Quality.
> It's the only way we can talk about it. The problem arises in taking
> the intellectual term Dynamic Quality to mean nonintellectual value,
> as you do in your paragraph above. Dynamic Quality is value. If you
> insist on one, that is the "essence" of the MOQ. You know that, Platt.
> 
> >Platt:
> > The MOQ escapes the intellectual level by including within its system of
> > understanding that, "Thought is not a path to reality,".a direct contradiction
> > of intellectual values.
> 
> Dan:
> No, the MOQ is an intellectual system of understanding reality, not
> reality itself, which is why thought will never bring us closer to
> reality.
> 
> >Platt:
> > If thus expressing my opinion gets me banned from mog_discuss, so be it. But, I
> > hope not and look forward to comments. .
> 
> Dan:
> Quit being a cry baby.
> 
> Please.

[Platt]
"From the baby's point of view, something, he knows not what, compels 
attention. This generalized "something," Whitehead's "dim  apprehension," is 
Dynamic Quality." (Lila, 9). 

We can learn something from babies.