Hi wim
Thanks for your reply, "i" agree in part when you say
We are both conscious and subconscious. We are aware (= part of intellectual
> patterns of values) because intellectual patterns of values increase the
> stability and versatility of some social patterns of values that favor
> awareness AND because the experience of intellectual value is somehow in
> itself 'worth the while of paying attention'
but I do think they ( the subconscious and conscious ) are separate parts of
your being, but are linked at some level.
And yes maybe the stove analogy wasn't a good one, but if you continued to
sit on the stove, ( as a conscious individual you may decide it's not really
that hot ) at what point does your subconscious kick in to finally get you
off... not a biological reflex at all in this instance. ( in fact the
original hot stove never was a reflex, it was an involuntary response...
very different physiologically).
Do you see my point now, we can all at times through our conscious will, do
things which are not good for our wellbeing or we can seek to control our
subconscious responses ( the control of pain through meditation for example
), we can go against the experience/ flow of quality, but our subconscious
will try to gain control, to protect us from ourselves, to stop us damaging
our bodies.
This is what bothers me.
It seems to point ( at least to me ) that we are mostly 'run' by our
subconscious, and it is our conscious mind which has to struggle against the
ever present subconscious by rationalising the world to overcome it. And we
can definitely learn subconsciously, all children do!, this seems to go
against your assumption that " Some kinds of quality (intellectual quality,
DQ) cannot be experienced
subconsciously however. "
I've got a long way to go with this however, but I am far from convinced.
Cheers
Rod
on 19/8/02 10:27 pm, Wim Nusselder at wim.nusselder@antenna.nl wrote:
> Dear Rod,
>
> I don't think I skirted your 18/8 23:27 +0100 question "How does our
> subconscious react to quality?".
> I simply refuse to think of 'my subconscious (mind)' and 'my conscious
> (mind)' as separate parts of 'me'. The way in which you phrase your
> questions (now, 19/8 19:39 +0100, you add 'which is the dominant of the
> two?') makes 'subconsciousness' and 'consciousness' into independent or at
> least separable 'subjects'.
>
> Neither 'subconsciousness and consciousness are effected equally by quality
> experience' nor 'one of the two dominates in aiding us to react to quality
> experience' is a meaningful statement in my version of the MoQ (and I think
> in Pirsig's version, but I am tired of discussing orthodoxy).
>
> 'I' experiences quality both subconsciously and consciously and behaves/acts
> accordingly, expressing and being part of social and intellectual patterns
> of values. I tend to associate subconscious with social and conscious
> experience and behavior with intellectual patterns of values. (I think all
> experience of social value is subconscious, unless reflected in intellectual
> value, and all intellectual value is conscious. I doubt whether we say it
> the other way round: everything subconscious is not necessarily social.)
> Most of what 'I' does is not consciously motivated. It is 'determined' (as
> long as 'I' doesn't make it conscious) by habitual patterns and social
> roles. (I am not talking about the biological processes in my body.) In that
> sense subconscious quality experience and behavior is dominant.
> Some kinds of quality (intellectual quality, DQ) cannot be experienced
> subconsciously however.
> The 'hot stove example' doesn't say anything at all about the relative
> importance of subconscious and conscious quality experience: it's just a
> biological reflex.
>
> You wrote:
> 'Surely this goes to the very heart of who/what we are! Why are we aware at
> all?'
>
> We are both conscious and subconscious. We are aware (= part of intellectual
> patterns of values) because intellectual patterns of values increase the
> stability and versatility of some social patterns of values that favor
> awareness AND because the experience of intellectual value is somehow in
> itself 'worth the while of paying attention' (the development of
> intellectual patterns of values having gone 'off on purposes of its own' in
> Pirsig's words from chapter 12 of 'Lila').
>
> With friendly greetings,
>
> Wim
>
>
>
> 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 : Fri Oct 25 2002 - 16:06:20 BST