MYSTIC ROGER CONTINUES TO ENJOY THE EXPERIENCE
To Glove, Platt, Mary and Ken, the Walter's old and new, and Rich who needs
to get his butt back in here to help defend me. :-)
I shall again rephrase the issues:
Pirsig wrote:"These patterns can't by themselves perceive or adjust to
Dynamic Quality. Only a living being can do that."
Mary then suggested that taken in context, Pirsig is refering only to the
social and intellectual patterns that cannot respond to DQ. I stated that
though I wish she was right, that I doubted her interpretation. I gave no
evidence to support my doubts though. (Rich, didn't you have a second quote
somewhere?)
Glove then gives a Pirsig quote to refute Mary's comment.
Pirsig wrote:
>"Yes, the four levels are a practical device, a static
>intellectual pattern, rather than a representation of
>ultimate reality."
Glove added:
>I think that settles the question of whether Pirsig was referring only to
>social or intellect patterns.
Roger now adds:
I agree that the four levels are intellectual patterns. I said as much in my
initial post to you on this. However, this quote is still not refuting Mary's
interpretation. The initial pirsig quote in question is whether patterns can
respond to DQ, not whether they are intellectual constructs.
But to clarify, I intuit that Mary's escape from this dilemma is wrong too.
And I agree that intellectually derived patterns can't respond to DQ. My BIG
PROBLEMO with Pirsig's statement is that he is neglecting to state that
"living beings" are static intellectual constructs as well.
I wrote:
>If Mary's interpretation is correct though it does seem to shoot a
>minor hole in Glove's argument and Platt's agreement that the MOQ is
>solipsistic.
Glove replied:
>I want to know what you did with Mystic Roger...
Roger:
I never met a solipsistic mystic. ;-)
Glove:
>I did not say that which is not experienced does not exist... I said making
>any statement about what does not exist is problematical.
Roger:
I agree with your summary of the post in question. However, I am still
disagreeing with your original quote that the universe began "when we each
became aware of it" and ends "when each of us as individuals die." Though,
in my initial response, again, I did agree that the static intellectual model
will die.
You and Platt are right that our static models die with us. But my point is
that we are static models too...... am I making no sense????? DQ is all that
is .
More quotes:
My quotes:
>Clearly, I agree that there ain't no subjects without objects. They are two
>sides of the same illusory coin. However to say that only living beings
>perceive and adjust to DQ is PURE SOM B/S. Experience does not just create
>the illusory object, it also creates the illusory subject. Living beings
>themselves are just collections of patterns derived from DQ. DQ is not
>something to be responded to....it is the response itself. It is the event
>from which living beings are derived. Experience is primary. Experience is
>DQ. You do not exist independent of the world. The world does not exist
>independent of you. But DQ always exists everywhere. And you and I are
>not really the illusions of Maya. The true deep reality is that we are pure
>DQ.
Glove Response quote:
>Wait a minute... I do see Mystic Roger lurking about! Consider for a moment
>that we are perceivers of reality and if that is so then responding to
>Dynamic Quality is the highest moral action we can take and to not respond
>to DQ is to be in stasis. But experience is not Dynamic Quality. Experience
>is not even primary. Experience is secondary to the Quality Event. Reponse
>can come before experience in certain instances. Take the act of hammering
>for example. Response is Dynamic yet only experienced thru remembering the
>act of hammering. Knowing the act. Performing it. Response to DQ is
>unactualized until experienced then it is actualized as remembered. Hmmm...
Roger:
Absolutely not! How can you argue that DQ is not Pure Experience? Pirsig
says it so often that it becomes a cliche.
I briefly thumbed through my new copy of Lila and was able to find Pirsig
referencing Quality or DQ to Experience on Page 73 (his initial Lila
definition of the term), p75, p76 (twice), p90 (where he carefully corrects
Rigel's statement that it is not experiential). Fast forwarding to the end
of the book, he equated Radical empiricism and DQ to direct everyday
experience on p419. The rest of the book and ZMM and SODV all repeat this
pattern too many times for me to count. Further, Anthony's paper (both of
them), which Pirsig reviewed and commented, has this as the exact definition
too. Though Pirsig and Anthony will both state that this is not "subjective
experience". (this may have been what Glove was refuting????)
As for it being secondary to the Quality Event, I don't think so. He defines
DQ as the "stream of quality events." I guess this might in some way be
interpreted as secondary, but I would say it is two references to the same
basic DQ/QE.
More of my quotes:
>There is no provision for life after death in the MOQ. However, there is
>the provision that your life was an illusion from the beginning. Your life
and
>your world is just the illusory dance of Lila.
Glove's response:
>How can there be life after death? Isn't that really a bit impossible? If
>there is something after death it is "something" we cannot conceive of, a
>dazzling dark, a great mystery that will only be revealed to us as we wait.
>But not life... enjoy it while we may!
Roger:
I didn't say there was life after death ....in fact I said there wasn't. I
said there is no death or life....just static dead intellectual patterns
called life and death. And these patterns were never truly alive to begin
with. Direct Experience is all, and like you, Glove, agree that we should
just enjoy.
But then again I could be wrong.
I love you all,
Roger
PS -- Walter thx for the post. Is there an imposter Walter out there? :-)
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:05 BST