[MD] The hard question.

[MarshaV]

dmb,


On May 27, 2012, at 11:18 AM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:

> 
> Marsha said:
> ... As Hagen 202 (1997, p.30) notes, one of the most fundamental truths noted by the Buddha is that all aspects of our experience are in constant flux and change.  ...Please note in the above quote "all aspects of our experience are in constant flux and change". 
> 
> 
> dmb says:
> This is exactly where you go wrong.

Marsha:
I have?  These are not my words.  This is a quote from the MoQ Textbook.  No, I don't have it wrong; you have not realized that the fundamental nature of static quality is Dynamic Quality.


> You've misconstrued Dynamic Quality so that it includes absolutely everything, including static quality.  That's exactly the point where DQ and sq are conflated. That's where you undo the MOQ's first and most important distinction; the distinction between static and dynamic.

Marsha:
The distinction is rhetorical, not absolute.


> Like I said, Pirsig and James also say that (direct or immediate or pre-intellectual) experience is constantly in flux. But you are saying this about static patterns, which are contrasted with the immediate flux of life. 

Marsha: 
Ever-changing does not imply Dynamic Quality, which I understand to be unpatterned, and also indivisible, undefinable and unknowable.


> dmb:
> Pirsig says, "Quality is a direct experience independent of and prior to intellectual abstractions". DQ is immediate, pre-intellectual experience. Static patterns (abstractions, concepts, definitions, etc.) are secondary. Direct experience is a continuous flux but static pattens are neither. They are discontinuous, chopped it up into stable words and concepts. 
> 
> This is what Pirsig means when he quotes William James at the end of chapter 29:
> " 'There must always be a discrepancy between concepts and reality, because the former are static and discontinuous while the latter is dynamic and flowing.' Here James had chosen exactly the same words Phaedrus had used for the basic subdivision of the Metaphysics of Quality."

Marsha:
I responded to this in yesterday's post; check it out.  

Here's some textual evidence:







> 
> In other words, there must always be a DISTINCTION between static concepts and the directly experienced reality, because concepts are NOT a flowing flux while pre-intellectual experience is dynamic and flowing. The DISTINCTION between static and dynamic is the most basic line drawn in the MOQ.
> 
> There is plenty of textual evidence that shows the importance this distinction.
> 
> "Subjects and objects are secondary. They are concepts derived from something more fundamental which he described as 'the immediate flux of life which furnishes the material to our later reflection with its conceptual categories. In this basic flux of experience [DQ] the distinctions of reflective thought [sq], such as those between consciousness and content, subject and object, mind and matter have not yet emerged in the forms [sq] which we make them. Pure experience cannot be called either physical or psychical. It logically proceeds this distinction."
> 
> "Quality is a direct experience independent of and prior to intellectual abstractions. Quality is indivisible, undefinable and unknowable in the sense that there is a knower and a known, but a metaphysics can be none of these things. A metaphysics must be divisible, definable and knowable, or there isn't any metaphysics."
> 
> "In the past Pheadrus' own radical bias caused him to think of Dynamic Quality alone and neglect static patterns of quality. Until now he had always felt that these static patterns were dead. They have no love. They offer no promise of anything. To succumb to them is to succumb to death, since that which does not change cannot live. But now he was beginning to see that this radical bias weakened his own case. Life cannot exist on Dynamic Quality alone. It has no staying power. To cling to Dynamic Quality is to cling to chaos. He saw that much can be learned about Dynamic Quality by studying what it is not rather that futilely trying to define what it is... Slowly at first, and then with increasing awareness that he was going in a right direction, Phaedrus' central attention turned away from any further explanation of Dynamic Quality and turned to the static patterns themselves" (Robert Pirsig in Lila). 
> 
> "Static quality patterns are dead when they are exclusive, when they demand blind obedience and suppress Dynamic change. But static patterns, nevertheless, provide a necessary stabilizing force to protect Dynamic progress from degeneration. Although Dynamic Quality, the Quality of freedom, creates this world in which we live, these patterns of static quality, the quality of order, preserve our world. Neither static nor Dynamic Quality can survive without the other."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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