[MD] The Dynamics of Value

[Ham Priday]

Hey, Andre --


> Here is the full Annotation Ham (I noticed I had omitted
> the term 'intellectual'):
>
> Annotn. 65. 'It seems close but I think it is really very far apart. In 
> the
> Copenhagen Interpretation, and in all subject-object metaphysics,
> both the observed (the object) and the observer (the subject) are
> assumed to exist prior to the observation. In the MOQ, nothing exists
> prior to the observation. The observation creates the intellectual 
> patterns
> called “observed” and “observer.” Think about it. How could a subject
> and object exist in a world where there are no observations?'
>
> But when you say:'... I cannot comprehend how observation can occur
> without an 'observer'.' you are absolutely correct. But where does it say
> that? What the MOQ argues is that the observer and that which is
> observed arise together. You cannot have the one without the other.

That you omitted the term "intellectual" is significant to your premise.  My 
question is: Who's intellect?

If we can stop playing 'Pirsig says' long enough to consider just what 
"observation" means in this context, I think we must conclude that the 
'observer' is primary to the observation.  I'm not talking about "before and 
after", but about the entity whose experience does the observing and is 
cognizant of the object experienced.  Not everyone has experienced this 
object, so it is surely not a universal image.  Rather, it exists only in 
the conscious mind of the subjective agent.  Absent the subject and the 
image disappears.  This is true of every experience.

There is no logical reason to dismiss subjects and objects as the 
constituents of existential reality other than to satisfy a philosopher who 
is determined to posit existence as a unity.  Pantheists did that long 
before Pirsig.  That's a "let's pretend" world.  If it were not for 
DIFFERENCE there would be no experience and no reality to observe.  Indeed, 
the primary nature of physical reality is differentiated, relational 
beingness.  All human knowledge, all social progress, is based on that 
precept.  To do away with subjects and objects by euphemizing them as 
patterns of quality demeans the very function of individual value 
sensibility.

Existence is the differentiated mode of essential Oneness!
Vive la Différence!

Essentially speaking,
Ham