Tue, 08 Sep 1998 16:34:27 +0200
Magnus Berg wrote:
> Hi Diana and Squad
> You wrote:
> > The very notion of free will is inseparable from the notion of
> > subjects and objects. To even speak of it is to show that you've
> > swallowed the subject-object metaphysics whole.
> I don't think so. It only means that subjects and objects are still
> real. They are not the first division of reality but they are
> deductible using MoQ divisions.
> > Lose the idea of subjects, on the other hand, and the question
> > evaporates; there's nothing left to have a will.
> But that doesn't explain anything. Granted, the question disappears
> but for most people, including me :), me-ness feels very real and
> needs an explanation, not just an invalidation of the original
> question.
Diana, Roger, Magnus, Jonathan, Horse, Platt & LSq.
Ever since Diana posted her reply to Roger about determinism and
free will I have been writing on a commentary, but each time it
looked finished someone posted something that added to the quandary.
I admit that the LILA passage (quoted in Diana's full message) isn't
clear, and Roger put the finger on the soft spot. Also do I admire
Diana for forwarding her bold proposition. It has full MOQ
coverage, but might not be easily understood by newcomers to
Pirsig's ideas.
I believe that Pirsig did see the contradiction, but we must bear in
mind that LILA was written long before anyone had heard about any
Metaphysics of Quality (only the Q-ideas of ZMM) and he must have had
endless qualms about whether anyone would understand ANYTHING of
it. If he had written it now - after the LS - he would have
formulated it more in Diana's vein.
Platt pointed to my idea of Subject-Object thinking as Q-Intellect
(SOTAQI): which is an effort to create a SOM-MOQ transformator.
Me-ness and other-ness is a static latch and along with it came the
free-will riddle. Diana is correct when she says: ...."It is I the
subject that has free will...etc. and ..." 'Man makes choices' is
pure SOM".... Exactly, but if subject-object 'thinking/logic' is
viewed as a mere static step - not the whole Q-reality itself - the
riddle is solved.... IMHO.
Magnus is also correct when he says: "Me-ness feels real". Sure, it is
as real as Q-Intellect-reality comes, but still subordinate to the
Quality-totality-reality. He adds ...."needs and explanation". Yes,
this is one explanation.
Bodvar
PS Jonathan's and Horse's commentaries to the said quandary and their
own development on the subject is just good.
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:33 BST