In a message dated 5/24/02 11:47:42 PM GMT Daylight Time, enoonan@kent.edu
writes:
<< Subj: MD Schematic.?!
Date: 5/24/02 11:47:42 PM GMT Daylight Time
From: enoonan@kent.edu (enoonan)
Sender: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
Reply-to: moq_discuss@moq.org
To: moq_discuss@moq.org (MOQ)
Hello Squonk
SQUONK:
How does anyone feel about rearranging this schematic so that the first box,
Quality produces Romantic quality, which then produces Classic quality in a
string rather than dualism?
Mind/matter concept would then emerge from Romantic quality via Classic
analysis.
Classic quality would then emerge from Romantic quality and the mind/matter
dualism of Descartes would have an inherent Romantic appeal.
ERIN: I like your schematic. I am hesistant to agree that it is not a
duality.
It seems like your schematic is a vertical duality.
I think it's cool it works both ways--what you are doing reminds me of this
quote.
PIRSIG:
My favorite quotation from him was that he liked to take an idea and bound
it
on the North and bound it on the East and on the South and on the West, just
to see how far it goes. Lincoln was a surveyor in his early years and I
think
he used the word 'bound' in the old surveyor's sense. I see a lanky man with
a
compass and transit and surveyor's rods and chain pushing his way through
the
underbrush of the wilderness, very concerned about accuracy in determining
where this particular parcel of land stops and the next begins. He knows
that
if he doesn't get his measurements right, endless disputes and problems will
follow later on. If you study Lincoln's speeches closely you'll see that,
although he sounds casual enough on the surface, there's a careful
surveyor's
precision underlying every sentence he writes.
ERIN
>>
Thank you Erin, this is most generous of you.
I was thinking of Plotinus when i felt romantic quality to be prior to
Classic quality.
Its the unity of the Romantic that reminds me of the Plotinian realm of
a-temporal, non-spatial translucent forms where each idea is transparent to
all others in a unified 'known and knower' as one entity.
The analogy i use for myself is of a jar of marbles.
Are you familiar with marbles? They are glass beads used for games.
Imagine a glass jar full of marbles - each marble reflects all the others and
is seen by all producing a unified whole.
To continue the analogy, the Classic would be a selection of just a few
marbles and seen darkly.
In this way we may avoid duality and think in terms of diminution of that
which is more unified to that which is less unified?
All the best,
Squonk.
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 - 16:02:16 BST