On 11 September 1998 Bodvar wrote:
"The term "feeling" is even more ambiguous than love (still worse in
Norwegian where feeling and emotion are synonymous). However, one feels
basic sensations (impulses you call it), one feels complex emotions and one
even FEELS intellectual pleasure (by having a bright idea). My hunch is that
"feeling" is direct experience of Dynamic Quality! Remember MOQ's most basic
point: Experience=Quality.
This is a test balloon: "
I get a great big YES to the idea of "feeling" as a direct experience of
Dynamic Quality. As I think about it I know that my reaction is based on
wrestling with the concept of 'feeling' (particularly as distinct from
emotion) in the psychology of Carl Jung. Jung says that feeling is one of
four psychological functions along with thinking, intuition and sensation.
In this scheme we use intuition and senses (sensation) to gather information
about the world and we evaluate that information using thinking and feeling.
We use thinking to see if our information passes muster in terms of the
rules of thought. But the Feeling function is, according to Jung, primarily
about valuing. That's where the connection would be between the two systems
of thought. Feeling is the valuing function by which in Pirsig's philosophy
we perceive Quality.
I also think that the examples of feeling given follow Jung's concept of the
feeling function. Sensations, emotions and thoughts may all be involved in
the process of having a feeling reaction and therefore play their part in
discovering that value or Quality is involved. But they are distinct from
the actual perception of Quality - the intellectual pleasure is distinct
from the bright idea.
Well that's my test balloon!
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