Hi, Bill,
I wondered if I should answer you, your post having left me a bit
baffled, but well, here it is.
elg14 wrote:
> [quoting me]
> There are no static patterns in this universe, just as there are
> no trees, no sky, no stars, sub-atomic particles or self. These are
> words, ideas, models for our experience, which is forever dynamic. The
> self is never experienced, it is inferred from the seeming continuity of
> experience and memory."
> [end of quote]
>
> This is pretty true as far as I can see but it makes me laugh.
Good ! I'm always saying ridiculous things to makes people laugh, it's
my kind of humor, you see. Glad I made you happy. :)
> I think of
> the Objectivists I used to debate with on AOL. This kind of statement
> just drives the rationalists crazy. They feel like you're playing some
> kind of shell game with them.
>
Who gives a damn ?
I once had this kind of argument in an atheist forum. I tried to imply
that it was a mystic force (Quality) that was the foundation of both
science and religion. First they labelled me a religious nut (which I
denied with logical arguments), then a solipsist (which I again denied
saying it was a SOM PoV which had no meaning under the MOQ, which I
explained), and then... they lost interest ! They couldn't put me under
one of their labels, so I was overlooked, a bit like Phaedrus overlooked
the green flash all his life until he grew interested in it.
Nowadays, I never try to convince people who *know* they are right. It's
a waste of time. Their cup is full, and I've got better things to do
(like emptying mine in this forum).
> Dennis, the truth is that for you, there *is* the sky, stars,
> sub-atomic particles and self. They are more then just words, ideas
> and models for our experience which are forever dynamic.
There are also sensations, but then I fail to see what else there could
be. I'm not a Bouddha or a mystic, so of course I'm filtering all this
through my patterns (for a more inclusive description of what I mean by
this see my last post at the LS : "Soul and Self (continued)").
Getting the Dynamic perception bare is the most difficult thing in the
world to achieve. It nearly drove Pirsig mad, and you want me to try it
! Just because I'm limited doesn't mean I can't have an (imperfect) idea
of what things are like at this level of awareness.
> If this were
> true you would have power over all of the various quality events that
> emanate out from the primordial portal. You don't so you can only
> infer that everything is "forever dynamic". It works both ways.
>
Same thing as above : I'm making a model of what I believe reality to
be, I'm into the degenerate activity of metaphysics. But then, perhaps
you believe we should just all drop the subject and get a beer instead ?
;)
Well, anyway, I'll take this advice and go and fetch myself one.
............
Done.
> I have read of people who were said to have such extended power over the phenomenal
> world. They were credited with being able to actually change the
> reality represented by the fixed value of X into a reality represented
> by the fixed value of Y. These people did not indulge wantonly in
> mysticism and would've dismissed the assertion that a wholesome
> metaphysics is degenerate. They were people who thought in practical
> scientific terms about reality. They admired scientists. For them
> magic was the in the sweet fragrance of a flower. Being able to make
> a flower materialize out of thin air in the palm of your hand would be
> called *science* by them because such an act involved technique born
> of full knowledge of fixed scientific laws.
>
Huh ?... [Denis scratches his head, takes a gulp down and wisely decides
not to comment on this].
> I don't want to get involved in a discussion on such "miracles".
Good ! me neither...
> And
> I really have a bad attitude toward ghosts (confounding little
> buggers will suck every drop of energy out of you if given half a
> chance). What I will say is this: when Phaedrus tells a student of
> metaphysics to destroy all intellectual patterns and destroy them
> completely, he is ushering them into nothing more then a new flight of
> stairs in the "graduate school" of the MOQ. If he were to say the
> same thing to a real master of metaphysics, he would be met with
> laughter and a warning not to do it while he was driving on the
> freeway.
>
[Sigh]. Bill, you're getting Pirsig (and me) wrong. I believe you should
read the part about Zen students getting the patterns perfect again, and
perhaps (if you've got some spare time you've ABSOLUTELY no idea what to
do with), my lasts posts in general (and in particular my last one to
the LS last month).
BTW, what's a "real master of metaphysics" ?
> The position beyond this initial destruction of all intellectual
> patterns is just more patterned reality governed by tightly fixed
> laws. The graduate school of MOQ involves learning to undue these
> laws by scientific means. That would involve various techniques of
> meditation on mind, soul and ways of gaining control over the body.
There is no graduate school of MOQ (although Bodvar plans on opening
one).
The scientific means you're talking about aren't mentioned in any of
Pirsig's books.
When intellectual patterns are destroyed, we don't *know* what happens,
so "patterned" being an intellectual concept : what do you mean ?
Anyway, Pirsig doesn't talk about destroying the "intellectual"
patterns, but the "static" ones.
> If I thought the goal was to simply destroy all intellectual patterns I would
> ride completely out on a wave of morphine--through the "little death"
> of deep sleep--into the eternal peace of the "big sleep". But I'm not
> so sure it's that easy.
>
Re-read the part on madness in Lila, there's a statement on suicide
there (p. 455)
> Within one of the seven systems of Hindu thought is something they call
> Laya Yoga. It is exclusively reserved for highly intellectual
> students. The teaching involves completely unfolding the fixed map of
> reality mentally (and also experientially), until one understands his true position in
> this living, intelligent universe...and then folding it all back into itself
> by deeply esoteric but-still-logical means. Whether or not anybody ever
> graduates from this school is something I can't say. I'm still
> struggling for the gumption to locate and maintain an impeccable
> filing system for my business. It seems to me that Pirsig ended his public discourse
> on the MOQ precisely at the mid-way point.
>
> Bill
>
Bill, I don't really know what to make of this post. Have you been
convinced by Pirsig or not ? Are you playing the Devil's advocate ? I've
got nothing against people criticizing my views, but I don't see what
you're aiming at.
Mystic-but-Logical reality ? Graduating from mystic schools ? Man, I
don't know if it's you or me who's confused, but I get a feeling it's
not me... ;)
Cheerfully (I've just finished my beer)
Denis (aka. Drunk Fish)
PS : I've just found a quote from you which seems to resume your views :
"I think the stuff (SQ) is ultimately un-chewable. You can use it to
climb on,
but to fully consume it, you must let it melt to a liquid and swallow
it."
Would you care to comment on this ? I wonder if it contradicts what you
just said or not...
PPS : BTW, I'm french, and in French my name is spelled D-E-N-I-S,
"Dennis" is the English spelling. Itsy-bitsy rules, I know, but then I'm
not perfect.
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 - 16:03:07 BST