[MD] kill all intellectual patterns

[118]

Hi Joe,
You don't sound confused to me.
Mark

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Joseph Maurer <jhmau at comcast.net> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am confused!  Two is not one!
>
> Joe
>
>
> On 11/21/12 11:19 AM, "118" <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi dmb, Marsha
> >
> > I would propose that there is only one Truth.  The pragmatists have
> relegated
> > truths to usefulness which convert the basic meaning of truth to
> something
> > else.  I have presented the self/serving aspect of pragmatists in a
> previous
> > post.
> >
> > When dmb requests an appropriate reading of Pirsig, he is pointing
> towards
> > interpretation.  What often happens with any fundamental presentation of
> > Reality is the high jacking of such interpretation into dogma.  This is
> the
> > danger I see with dmb's pronouncements.  It would seem that he regards
> himself
> > as the True interpreter of Pisig's writings.  This same thing happened
> with
> > Christianity where people had to go to priests in order to understand the
> > "true message".
> >
> > By its very teachings, MoQ is anti-dogmatic.  The complete subjugation of
> > MoQ's intent into the realm of SQ, which seems to be dmb's intent with
> his
> > constant use of biblical quotes is not only counterproductive in a
> discussion
> > forum, but dangerous to MoQ.
> >
> > Dmb represents the academic arm of MoQ.  His pronouncements should be
> viewed
> > in terms of such SQ.  what he is lacking is the dynamic aspect of what
> Pirsig
> > presents.  I am glad that Marsha takes the time to bring balance to the
> > discussion of Quality.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On Nov 21, 2012, at 8:59 AM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> dmb said:
> >> That's the meaning of "truth" in the MOQ. "Truth is a static
> intellectual
> >> pattern within a larger entity called Quality."
> >>
> >> Marsha replied:
> >> Sure, 'truth' is _a_ (one among many) intellectual static pattern of
> value.
> >> A few definitions can be found in the dictionary.   And?
> >>
> >> dmb says:
> >> What? You think truth is singular? You think there is only one truth?
> That's
> >> absurd. Nobody has ever believed such a silly thing and for pragmatists
> like
> >> Pirsig there are many truths, all of which are provisional and invented
> - as
> >> opposed to eternal and discovered.
> >>
> >>
> >> dmb said previously:
> >> There is nothing logically contradictory about having an experience
> while
> >> thinking at the same time. The idea here is to get them both working
> >> TOGETHER. And doing that means putting them in their proper relation,
> knowing
> >> which is which.
> >>
> >>
> >> Marsha replied:
> >> They aren't really things to be working together.
> >>
> >>
> >> dmb says:
> >> What!? Okay now you're just contradicting yourself. Earlier you said,
> "Hasn't
> >> RMP stated that the ideal is to experience the Dynamic point-of-view
> >> simultaneously with the static point-of-view?"
> >>
> >> You want to see the textual evidence on this? We really don't have to
> guess
> >> what Pirsig says on this point. If you'd just stop ignoring the
> evidence you
> >> might have a chance to understand the most basic distinction in the
> MOQ. If
> >> you did stop being so willfully ignorant, my brain would have a heart
> attack.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "That's the whole thing: to obtain static AND Dynamic Quality
> >> SIMULTANEOUSLY."
> >> The whole trick is to "create a stable static situation where Dynamic
> Quality
> >> can flourish".
> >> "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."
> >> "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."
> >> "They don't tell him to shatter those static patterns...   ...you don't
> free
> >> yourself from static patterns by fighting them with other contrary
> static
> >> patterns, that is called bad Karma chasing its tail. You free yourself
> from
> >> static patterns by putting them to sleep. That is you master them...
> There at
> >> the center of the most monotonous boredom of static ritualistic
> patterns, the
> >> dynamic freedom is found."
> >>
> >> THE PROBLEM - "Our current modes of rationality   ...the whole
> structure of
> >> reason, handed down to us from ancient times, is no longer adequate. It
> >> begins to be seen for what it really is...emotionally hollow,
> esthetically
> >> meaningless and spiritually empty."  The problem is that "Reason and
> Quality
> >> had become separated and in conflict with each other" back in the days
> of
> >> Plato.
> >> THE SOLUTION - "He felt that the solution started with a new
> philosophy, or
> >> he saw it as even broader than that...a new spiritual rationality...in
> >> which... Reason was no longer to be "value free." Reason was to be
> >> subordinate, logically, to Quality."
> >> "...I'm trying to say is that the solution to the problem isn't that you
> >> abandon rationality but that you expand the nature of rationality so
> that
> >> it's capable of coming up with a solution."
> >> "Now I want to show that that classic pattern of rationality can be
> >> tremendously improved, expanded and made far more effective through the
> >> formal recognition of Quality in its operation."
> >> "That was exactly what is meant by the Metaphysics of Quality. Truth is
> a
> >> static intellectual pattern within a larger entity called Quality."
> >> "I think that it will be found that a formal acknowledgment of the role
> of
> >> Quality in the scientific process doesn't destroy the empirical vision
> at
> >> all. It expands it, strengthens it and brings it far closer to actual
> >> scientific practice."
> >> The MOQ "says that Dynamic Quality [is] the value-force that chooses an
> >> elegant mathematical solution to a laborious one, or a brilliant
> experiment
> >> over a confusing, inconclusive one" and "Dynamic value is an integral
> part of
> >> science. It is the cutting edge of science itself."
> >> "A motorcycle functions entirely in accordance with the laws of reason,
> and a
> >> study of the art of motorcycle maintenance is really a miniature study
> of the
> >> art of rationality itself."
> >> "It seems as though a society [or a philosophy discussion group] that is
> >> intolerant of all forms of degeneracy shuts off its own Dynamic growth
> and
> >> becomes static. But a society that tolerate all forms of degeneracy
> >> degenerates. Either direction can be dangerous."
> >>
> >>
> >> Marsha said:
> >> I agree this RMP quote [killing intellect] and I explained why.  And my
> >> explanation didn't look anything like the literalist twist that you
> spin it
> >> through.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> dmb says:
> >> The trick, obviously, is to read Pirsig so that all his quotes agree
> with
> >> each other. The quotes I've supplied do NOT contradict your favorite
> quote.
> >> It only seems to because you're taking it literally and otherwise
> failing to
> >> understand the meaning of it. If your reading were correct, then it
> would
> >> mean that Pirsig has contradicted himself, made opposite claims such
> that we
> >> have to choose one or the other.
> >>
> >> What's easier to believe, Marsha? That Pirsig is full of contradictory
> >> nonsense or you are failing to understand him. Pirsig's MOQ is just
> fine. The
> >> problem is yours, not Pirsig's or mine or anyone else's.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 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
> > 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
>
>
> 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
>