[MD] DMB and Me

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Dave T. (R2D2)

20 Mar. 
 
[Bo] before 
> > "Immediate experience" is the most abused tenet of the MOQ. As
> > used in ZAMM it was the (dynamic) pre-intellectual phase that
> > preceded the (static) intellectual ditto, the latter being the
> > subject confronted by objects.
> > NB! In ZAMM "intellect" was the only static level)
 
D.T.
> [Pirsig as edited by DMB-ZAMM, pp. 282-83] 

    "In my mind now is an image of a huge, long railroad train, 
    one of those 120-boxcar job. In terms of the analogy, Classic 
    Knowledge, the knowledge taught by the Church of Reason, is 
    the engine and all the boxcars. Romantic Quality, in terms of 
    this analogy, isn't any ``part'' of the train. It's the leading edge 
    of the engine, a two-dimensional surface of no real 
    significance unless you understand that the train isn't a static 
    entity at all. The real train of knowledge isn't a static entity 
    that can be stopped and subdivided. It's always going 
    somewhere. On a track called Quality. Romantic reality is the 
    cutting edge of experience. It's the leading edge of the train of 
    knowledge that keeps the whole train on the track. Traditional 
    knowledge is only the collective memory of where that leading 
    edge has been. At the leading edge there are no subjects, no 
    objects, only the track of Quality ahead, and if you have no 
    formal way of evaluating, no way of acknowledging this 
    Quality, then the entire train has no way of knowing where to 
    go. You don't have pure reason...you have pure confusion. 
    The leading edge is where absolutely all the action is. The 
    leading edge contains all the infinite possibilities of the future. 
    It contains all the history of the pastà The cutting edge of this 
    instant right here and now is always nothing less than the 
    totality of everything there is."  

> [Dave]
> Bo read this train analogy again. If "the cutting edge of this
> instant" in ZaMM is what is called  "immediate experience" in Lila
> then your claim that: -" it [is] the (dynamic) pre-intellectual phase
> that preceded the (static) intellectual [phase], the latter being the
> subject confronted by objects." is a mistaken interpretation.

> Because RMP here in ZaMM says quite clearly, " The cutting edge of
> this instant right here and now is always nothing less than the
> totality of everything there is."  So "immediate experience" right
> here and now at some instant in time contains both the dynamic and
> static, subjects and objects, black and white, you and me,
> EVERYQUALITY, EVERYNOW. Intellectual knowledge is the history, the
> memories, of our combined cutting edge events.

This gets a bit ridiculous, the MOQ postulates the DQ/SQ dualism 
(the fact that both are different aspects of the same underlying 
Quality can be no issue) Then there is no immediate experience more 
immediate than DQ unless we have some "trinity". In the train 
analogy the locomotive and the cars he calls Classic Quality  (he 
actually says classic knowledge but it must be Quality, no?) while the 
leading edge is Romantic Quality. This can safely be translated into 
DQ/SQ ... no?

He actually says that the tracks are Quality, but that's a goof, if so we 
have the "trinity" again like in the "Quality/MOQ" meta-metaphysics 
where the big QUALITY becomes the leading edge, the train = SQ 
and the track = the "static DQ" of the MOQ. Your "immediate 
experience containing both DQ and SQ" is a variety of this  
monstrosity. God what a pathetic show just to avoid the MOQ.      


Bodvar