[MD] The algebra of illusion.

[MarshaV]

Dmb,   

No, no, no...    You want to ignore my posts, then ignore my posts.   

> On Aug 30, 2011, at 11:43 PM, david buchanan wrote:
>> 
>> dmb says:
>> Another good point. Pirsig's rejection of the Cartesian self certainly doesn't mean the MOQ rejects any conception of the self. The MOQ's self includes the body as well as the mind. 


Marsha
I don't count on you being able to separate from the mind(subject) body(object) point-of-view.  And you cannot seem to keep your definitions straight or your contexts.     Sorry, not interested.    
 
 
Marsha
 

On Sep 9, 2011, at 4:54 PM, david buchanan wrote:

> 
> "When X purports (through a medium of appearance) to exist in manner F, to person P, X-as-F is illusory when X does not really exist in manner F."
> 
> "Most generally, an illusion involves a conflict between appearance and reality.  Something, X, appears to be the case, but there is something about X that does not reflect reality; it MISLEADS the person to whom it appears.  In other words, X PURPORTS, through the appearance, to exist in a particular manner, when X does NOT REALLY exist in the purported manner."   (Albahari, Miri, 'Analytical Buddhism: The Two-tiered Illusion of Self ' p.122) 
> 
> 
> 
> dmb says:
> 
> There is more than one reason why this equation can't be used against the MOQ's claims, not least of which is the fact that none of them are predicated on a distinction between appearance and reality. As we all know, the MOQ rejects the distinction between subjective and objective, which is the modern, scientific version of appearance and reality. For the radical empiricists, experience and reality amount to the same thing. It's possible that there could be some reality outside of our experience, beyond reality as it appears to us, but we can only wonder and speculate. In the MOQ, appearance is reality. Static and Dynamic Quality are both known in experience and cannot rightly be construed as appearance and reality. They both appear and they're both real, although the MOQ does insist that static concepts are secondary and provisional. Which brings me to the second point.
> 
> The equation works against certain claims, claims about what things "really" are beyond their appearances. But notice what happens when you take the MOQ's claim and plug that into the equation. Let "X" stand for earth, sky, heavens, philosophy, art or science. It hardly matters because the MOQ claims that our reality exists as a pile of analogies, every last bit of it. His "F" is the analogy, an analogue that agrees with experience and the previous body of analogues. His X-as-F strikes a blow against claims as to what things "really" are. It says that your idea of the earth and sky and everything else is just that, an idea. It says don't reify that idea, don't believe that your idea is how things "really" are.
> 
> 
> If you plug Pirsig's claim into the equation, it's like using a double negative. You'd end up reversing yourself, because the MOQ and that equation are both meant to work against the claims of Platonists, essentialists, realists and the like. It would be a matter of being opposed to essentialism AND opposed to the opponents of essentialism at the same time.
> 
> And thirdly, the equation rests upon a kind of performative contradiction. It pushes back against claims as to how things "really" are but to say that "X" doesn't REALLY exist as "F", you've got to say that "X" is REALLY something else. And how is that ever going to be anything other than an endless battle of speculative, unverifiable, metaphysical claims? Instead, the MOQ simply says that "X" really is just "X" and the only question is the value of "X" as "X". The MOQ doesn't if an idea corresponds with reality as it really is, but does it work AS an idea. It has to work in experience and so ideas agree with reality in that sense, but this is not correspondence to an objective reality of things so much as a good marriage between your thinking and your living. See?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   		 	   		  
> 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


 
___