[MD] grmbl

[Mary]

Hi Ron,

> Bodvar:
> OK this is me not Platt, but subjects and objects - along with all S/O
> dualisms - came to pass with the Greeks. Isn't it possible to get this
> ESSENTIAL message into your head? (ZAMM 382)
> 
>     What is essential to understand at this point is that until now
>     there was no such thing as mind and matter, subject and
>     object, form and substance. Those divisions are just dialectical
>     inventions that came later. The modern mind sometimes tends
>     to balk at the thought of these dichotomies being inventions
>     and says, ``Well, the divisions were there for the Greeks to
>     discover,'' and you have to say, ``Where were they? Point to
>     them!'' And the modern mind gets a little confused and
>     wonders what this is all about anyway, and still believes the
>     divisions were there. But they weren't, as Phædrus said. They
>     are just ghosts, immortal gods of the modern mythos which
>     appear to us to be real because we are in that mythos. But in
>     reality they are just as much an artistic creation as the
>     anthropomorphic Gods they replaced.
> 
> Ron:
> This passage illustrates the concept that the s/o distinction
> is an intellectual invention, just like Gods, ghosts and myths.
> S/O appears to be real but it is'nt it's just as made up as
> the Gods it replaces.
> You and Mary maintain that S/O was there for the greeks to discover
> just as MoQ was there for Pirsig to discover.
> 
[Mary Replies] 
Sure.  I agree with everything you've said right up to the point where you
say, "You and Mary maintain that S/O was there for the Greeks to discover".
That certainly came out of nowhere!  I don't know how to be more clear.  I
do not agree with that.  The whole point is that it was invented not
discovered don't you think?

> This Quote contradicts that assertion.
> 
[Mary Replies] 
Au contraire, mon ami!  The quote supports Bo's assertion.

> Just an fyi
> 
[Mary Replies] 
Ditto.

Guess we really are talking past each other.

Oh well,
Mary