[MD] Rorty and Mysticism

[118]

Hi Steve,
I guess I suffer from the same defects.  Dynamic quality is meant to be kept
secret, like something godlike by those in the know.  This is not suitable
for a metaphysics, in my opinion.  I suppose if you don't describe it, then
you can never be debated on it.  Reading a poem is full of Quality, even if
it takes time to reach you intellect (several hundredths of a millisecond),
because when it does, it is still expressed as Quality, not as something
different.  This whole notion of a time lag comes from the science of
physiology.  It tries to make what we sense somewhat mysterious and
powerful.  Creating a word and releasing it from your mouth is dynamic
quality in action, nothing less.  I am curious why rational people need to
subscribe to the irrational to make a rational argument.  Sure, everything
is made up, but that is a given; the sun makes up its light, so what?

Mark


> Steve:
> I am just as incorrigible or perhaps as dense as Matt is on this
> issue. I can't see why the negative quality of a hot stove is any more
> pure or direct than the quality of a poem or a verbal insult. And I
> don't think that Pirsig means to say so, even though he may too easily
> be read that way. What Pirsig wants to say is that Quality comes
> first. The static quality that is recognized as rocks, or trees, or
> words is derived from that Quality experience. But words don't have
> any lower ontological or epistemological status than do sunsets. A
> poem isn't any less pure than a sunset. Knowledge of each is both
> purely derived from Quality and equally secondary. The experience of
> each is pure Quality and equally primary.
> 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/md/archives.html
>