[MD] Sympathy for the Devil

[MarshaV]

Greetings,

Had anybody written "ever-changing static patterns", it would be confusing, but that was dmb's misrepresenting what I wrote.  He rearranged the words and pulled them out of context.  I presented my "definition" of self:  

'The “self” is a flow of ever-changing, conditionally co-dependent and impermanent static patterns value in the infinite field of Dynamic Quality. 

I further explained: 
 
And as I pointed out many times, it is not anti-intellectual or a contradiction to understand that patterns may maintain a static, stable identity at the same time as they and their context are undergoing constant change. 

Think of the Ship of Theseus, or a parade (Hume) where everyone drops out but is replaced so that the parade is maintained, or the body with its cells constantly being replaced... 

Above all  (the MoQ being in agreement with Radical Empiricism) this definition agrees with my experience.   

And there is still nothing Buddhist or mystical implied.


Marsha
 
 

On Feb 8, 2013, at 9:52 AM, ARLO JAMES BENSINGER JR <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:

[Ant to DMB]
Anyway, yes, a phrase/"definition" such as "ever-changing static patterns" could be quite confusing to anyone not familiar with Pirsig's work but, as Northrop points out in the "Logic of Sciences and Humanities" this type of error is something we all have to be aware of.

[Arlo interjects]
To be sure, we need to make sure we are not talking about collapsing into S/O metaphysical primacy (and I doubt that DMB is making this error). But, as I said, we also need to ensure we don't collapse Pirsig's ideas into a revamped Heraclitian flux philosophy...  snip