MD Moral Compass

From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Fri Dec 03 1999 - 05:10:41 GMT


DMB responds to ROGER in THE GREAT WAR OF QUOTES...

But, but , but Roger, you've got Pirsig contradicting himself. That
can't be right. It must be a problem with interpetation. A war of quotes
can be a useful exercise, but you're just using mysticism as a
philosophical monkey wrench. I mean, the topic is the MOQ's "moral
compass", which certainly includes the levels and the codes, but you're
quoting Pirsig's references to Mysticism and Dynamic Quality itself,
both of which are beyond static patterns. Don't get me wrong, DQ clearly
has a place in Pirsig's universe, but the method of analysis absolutely
requires clear thoughts and such. This is philosophy, not meditation. In
this forum and in this discussion we need facts and reason.

You can use Pirsig's mysticism as an excuse for imprecision.

I probably don't need to say it again but for the new-comers, I think
the MOQ not only explains the true nature of Mysticism itself, it also
describes a universe every Mystic can love. But that does NOT contradict
the fact that we live in a world of static patterns. Yes, the ultimate
goal is to transcend all that in favor of Dynamism, but static values
are necessary to that process. As the author of the Guidebook once said,
"You've got to have a mind to loose." He meant that there is a
difference between ignorance and transcendence. I'm saying you're
ignorant. That's the last thing I'd ever call you. Yes, the mystic must
abandon all static patterns, but she's got to have something to abandon.
And as the stories go, the hero returns home and shares the fruits of
the journey. The mystic doesn't want to keep the open secret, and so
returns to the world as an act of sacrifice. Not that the stories are
ture in a literal way, but they illustrate the same idea; SQ and DQ are
the whole thing together. The very name "Lila" means the cosmic dance
between the two.

Don't we agree that SQ and DQ are both necessary to the overall picture?
Wouldn't "dynamic philosophizing" be an IMPOSSIBLE thing to do? As
philosophers, aren't we SUPPOSED to deal with intellectual static
patterns?

Ha! I call myself a romantic and a mystic, but you've got me crying over
the lack of scientific accuracy and rational analysis. Go figure.

warm regards, DMB

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 - 16:03:16 BST