John, Wim, Rog and all;
John;
Immediacy means not that I am unable to look outside the present moment, but
that I am truly open to that moment. Any organism, society or idea that
loses contact with what is, risks disaster.
DMB;
As I understand it, the issue of immediacy is directly related to the levels
of development. When a person transcends to the next level its like breaking
out of a prison or waking from a delusion. The vision is broadened at each
succeeding level so that a person is able to attend to more and more of what
is. Otherwise immediacy becomes defined as the ability to notice the
slightest of breezes.
Wilber says "dualisms - between mind and body, mind and brain, consciousness
and form, mind and nature, subject and object, Left and Right - cannot be
solved on the relative plane - which is why that problem has never been
solved by conventional philosophy. The problem is not solved, but rather
dissolved, in the primordial state, which otherwise leaves the dualisms just
as they are, possessing a certain conventional or relative reality, real
enough in their own domains, but not absolute." (A Brief History of
Everything, p 232)
DMB...
John is interpreting this quote in a certain direction, an interesting
direction, but I'd like to point out its resemblance to the MOQ. Pirsig does
venture beyond conventional philosophy. He turns to mysticism and dissolve
these dualities. Further, the MOQ's static patterns are similarly
conventional in their realness, relatively real, but not absolute. But John
was going elsewhere with it...
John:
My argument links with this by asserting that the path to
the transpersonal is through attending to what is. As such, it is not an
intellectual path, though it can be discussed using language and intellect
by those who have experienced it. It is an experiential path, open to
dynamic quality, but not mired in the intellectual level, which it
surpasses. From this point of view, ideas are as constrictive of 'openness'
as is society of ideas. Ideas distort our perception. They force it into an
intellectual mold which is distanced from what is. They have a value at
their level, but it is not the ultimate level. Does this make sense to you?
DMB:
The experiential and intellectual paths are one. Or at least they aren't
incompatible. Reading and writing and thinking is doing something, its a
real experience as much as hang gliding - and just as thrillig if you're
doing it right. And the intellectual path ain't necessarily bad. It depends
where you're at. For someone trying to transcend the social level the
intellectual path would be toward a kind of liberation. It would make sense
in that case. But just as social level values can become an opressive prison
for one who is ready to move onward, so can intellectual values. Its true.
Ideas can become a trap. I understand that, at least in theory. In my
experience, ideas have only served to widen the perspective and enhance
appreciation. I can only look forward to the day when I'm so brilliant and
imaginative that mere ideas will be holding me back. But seriously, I think
there are many Wilberian levels within Pirsig's intellectual level. Some of
these can accomodate concepts that are beyond reason and logic. There are
levels of cognitive development within Pirsig's fourth level but can
appreciate the poetic language of the mystics and artists. And the ability
to attend expands as part of this development.
This "developmental psychology" sort of approach, this "evolutionary
consciousness" treatment of the MOQ sheds some light the "marketplace of
ideas". In this analogy, we are all like consumers who are walking down the
isle, pushing a cart and looking for the best ideas. It construes ideas as
objects to be inspected. There are lots of hidden assumptions in the notion,
but the most damaging one is the idea that people will choose their beliefs
and ideologies strictly on the merits, on how they stack up against the
other brands. But as Wilber, Pirsig and others show, nothing could be
further from the truth. The truth is that beliefs and ideologies are
selected at all. They are a feature of the individual. There is a hierarchy
of ideologies so that one moves from fascism to the more intellectual system
as development proceeds. There's a strong correlation between civil
libertarianism and high I.Q., for example. Different ideologies appeal to a
wide range of value systems and the one you wear says tons about where
you're at.
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 - 16:02:05 BST