> Hi, Victoria,
Hey
>
> I'm starting to enjoy those little debates again. ;)
So would I, if I could just get some sleep inbetween!
(the lack of which you may have to take into account when reading my
answers.)
> >The kiss may be wet, or the stove may be hot, these are just
descriptions,
> >not Values.
>
> Hehe ! I love to see that my hunt for the "just" word has brought down
> another prey... ;)
> *Just* descriptions ? Do you mean by this that these characteristics
aren't
> worth our attention, like SOM saying something that what's *just* in our
> minds isn't as real as their vaunted *objective* facts ? I would hate to
> replace a cultural blind spot by another. A metaphysics is only better if
it
> enlarges our conceptual perception of reality. "Wet", or "warm" is just as
> real as "good" or "bad", and might hold precious information.
It does hold precious information - it is how we sense our world.
I can take the information of my senses into account but the value of
something is still good or bad.
The "Wetness"of the kiss is important as are other factors in the situation,
for example, a "wet" kiss delivered by a cute girl you like has a different
value to a wet kiss from a slobbering german shepard with bad breath, no?
>
> On the hot stove example : sure the guy doesn't jump out of it because
it's
> hot, but because it's low value. But he would have done the same if he had
> sat on a porcupine, wouldn't he ? Do you mean to tell me that the
difference
> between 'hot' and 'spiky' is unimportant ?
The most important thing, I think, is the getting off of the low quality
situation (be it stove or porcupine ;-) as quickly as possible.
> That, in some way I confess I do
> not understand, this isn't included in his pre-intellectual awareness of
the
> situation ?
> I'm sure you understand now what I mean by saying that concentrating on
the
> positive/negative axis is restrictive, and not in accordance with
> experience.
Maybe we're just not understanding eachother?
Maybe another example will help...
When I look at a painting, I see the color, composition, style, medium used,
subject etc
but I sense it's value (as more then it's parts), as either good or bad
quality.
>
> >Would you say that getting a kiss from someone you're attracted to is a
> >quality situation? Or that someone is a quality kisser? The kiss may
> display
> >many characteristics "wet, warm etc", but it is still either of high
> quality
> >or not.
>
> Yes but it is *also* wet and warm. Why should we ignore these informations
?
> I think in his quest to understand the origins and importance of morals,
> Pirsig ignored the fact that value is multidimentional, and that when your
> rubb your hand across a surface, the good/bad feeling isn't the only
> information that reaches you. You also get a feeling of its texture, for
> one. That didn't fit in his "Quality" scheme, so he ignored it, but it
> doesn't mean we should do the same.
But I don't think he did ignore it, in SODaV, he states that:
"In the third box are biological senses: senses of touch, sight, hearing,
smell and taste.
The MoQ follows the empirical tradition here in saying that the senses are
the starting point of reality (see ;-)
but all importantly it includes a sense of value. Values are phenomena, to
ignore them is to misread the world.....this primary sense is a kind of gate
keeper for everything else an infant learns...."
So he is not trying to ignore the importance of the information the other
senses acquire, he is reiterating the presence and importance of a sense of
Value!
> As organisms designed for survival and evolution, we do have a tendance to
> fit things into good/bad boxes, since it allows us to make pragmatic
> decisions, and to choose according to a perceived maximum positive value.
> But other dimensions of value exist.
> What I agree with, is that evolution runs parallel to that
positive/negative
> axis, and that therefore Pirsig was right to talk about it in relation to
> moral conflicts. But without forgetting that this is ultimately a
> restrictive view that could becomes as soulless and blind as SOM
> materialism. That, I believe, is the crux of John Beasley criticism of the
> MOQ : that blind and ruthless search for "betterness for betterness'
sake".
> As a system (Pirsig rational morality), it can be as blind and stupid and
> soul-grinding as any "rational management" is.
>
> This world is chaotic. You don't survive in it because you follow a
system,
> even one based on Quality, but because you follow Quality itself. John is
> right, it's the path that's important, not the destination.
Yes, to follow Quality is by far the most noble path to take.
But I thought that's what Pirsig was saying?!
>
> >
> >Going back to your example, it's interesting to note that autistic people
> >rarely demonstrate emotion, their static social patterns of value seem to
> be
> >unformed (or atleast, underformed). Yet some of them, like "the rain man"
> >have extraordinary abilities in the arts (music, painting) or
mathematical
> >field. It seems to me, that inspite of or because of their underdeveloped
> >social and intellectual SPoV, they are somehow tapping straight into the
DQ
> >and it is manifested through them. Interestingly, it appears that by
> >nurturing their innate abilities, they grow in their social and cognitive
> >skills.
> >This struck me as I was reading your example, and I probably should put
> more
> >thought into this as time permits...which it doesn't at the moment!
>
> I know the feeling ! ;)
> And quite frankly, I do not have enough information about autism to hazard
a
> MOQ explanation of it, so I'll leave it at that for the moment.
>
> Seeya
>
> Denis
Goodnight!
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:27 BST