A couple of "running" comments......
> The MoQ is not a SOM philosophy. But is it?
Phew! Is General Relativity a Newtonian "philosophy"? No and a little yes!
The MOQ makes
the S/O metaphysics part of itself, the same way that any greater system
subsumes the old.
General Relativity "contains" Newtonian physics as a sub-set within itself,
good enough for
calculating moon landings and sattelite orbits, but unable to handle things
at extreme
conditions. Likewise: looking at reality from Intellect is good enough for
all practical
purposes, but a moqist KNOWS better.
But this is dependent upon accepting my SOL idea that SOM=Q-intellect.
> If biological and inorganic
> patterns are real but not conscious, should we not say that these
> patterns are objectively real; since they can exist by themselves,
> without a consciousness to shine upon them needed?
Yes, the Matter+Life =Object, Society+Intellect=Subject is a way of
subsuming the SOM
(another is the said SOL idea), but nowhere in LILA does Pirsig speak about
"consciousness" as any "continental divide". OK you are now off on vacation
so let's
postpone the consciousness issue until later.
<val:>I'll be waiting to hear more on that -- should I look in the archives?
> Instead of two words "subject-object" we have five
> "inorganic-organic-biological-social-intellectual" (I believe these are
> the levels: I never was good in them)... but no essential difference
> between these two perspective; it lies only in the jargon that's being
> used.
Why start discussing with such a weak understanding, not even knowing that
"biological" is
another word for "organic"? Well, who am I to scold anyone, the MDiscuss is
an open forum
and we have let the MFocus go to the dogs. Yet people should wait until they
are out of
(MOQ) kindergarten.
<val:>Sounds similar to Merleau-Ponty's overall orientation....
> Here is a question then: Define in a few sentences what YOU mean by
> subject-object-metaphysics.
> (To try to explain the intuitive simple can be illuminating. It happened
> to me just a few days ago when I explained 'reductionism' to my father).
In the meantime I join Squonk's:
> Physics deals with reality. Metaphysics deals with where reality came
from.
Agree! The scope of a metaphysics is enormous, the SOM is an enormity and
the MOQ will
become one.
<val:>The term metaphysics originally comes from Aristotle book that was
physically "meta" to his book on physics -- And the jargon stuck....
See you at the next stop.
Bo
PS:
Scott R. is my favourite. How many times have I rejected the "map is not the
terrain"
statement?
> Lastly, a while back I objected to the sentiment of "anything languaged
> is not the thing itself", not because it is untrue (the English word
> "cow" is not a cow) but in the thought that there is any thing (which
> excludes Quality, which is not a thing) that is not itself another sign
> in another language, albeit one not of spoken words or marks on paper. I
> feel the "the map is not the territory" mantra is SOM-ish.
<val:>Does this mean that how you feel "makes that" into an object for you
to then comment upon "at a distance"?
PPS
3WD's ...
> SOM is a term (created by Pirsig) to describe a school of philosophic
> thought which can be traced to early Greek times which subscribes to the
> notion that "the truth" is superior to "the good". And that this theory
> was and is dominant in all Western cultures. Furthermore, this theory
> was and is, appropriately applied, a necessary and "good" theory.
> However it's "good" is LIMITED, and the failure of Western civilization
> to understand this has, and may continue to lead to ongoing and systemic
> problems in the development of a "GOOD", long term, substainable human
> culture.
<val:>I have found "sustainable" to be a useful term in those discussions.
Good and True get captured very easily....
....is also good, but the "theory" term is too weak. The SOM is a
METAPHYSICS: Something
so basic that it's regarded natural - the way things are - as reality is -
as the world was
created ....etc. Not a mere theory. Elemenatry Dr. Thomas :-)
<val:>Yes, the "ready to hand" or "natural attitude" or "pre-reflective
immersion of being in the world" of the existential-phenomenological
orientation.
PPPS
Where is David Buchanan?
<val:>Waiting for Godot redux??? :)
val
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 - 16:02:20 BST