MD Some SOM Quality...

From: Patrick van den Berg (cirandar@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat Nov 09 2002 - 14:05:19 GMT

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD levels (Down with Types of Value, Up with Types of Patterns)"

    Hi all,

    I've been on the sidewalk last week or so, read half of the posts and
    found some interesting discussions. Through this Metaphysics of Quality
    list, I've come to appreciate some things differently, and not in a
    negative way it seems. Anyhow, I'd like to share some contemplations on
    the quality of Subject-Object Metaphysics. It's sort of odd, but now
    that this MoQ (and the writings of Nishida for example) has offered me a
    new perspective, I've come to value SOM not only from the outside, but
    perhaps even more so from the inside. I think it's because I see that
    SOM is not THE way, but A way to come to grips with reality.
    Somehow we're split off in some real extent from the rest of reality,
    what we call the universe or the world. 'The other' is also a good term,
    of which I was reminded in a discussion with a befriended
    theology-student: We as individuals are through some act of Grace (or if
    you prefer another interpetation of it in a Christian view: through The
    Fall out of Paradise) in dialogue with the world, we are 'selfs' that is
    in dialogue with 'the other' when we're riding our bicycle, when we're
    working behind our computers, when we're talking to other people, etc.
    Everything we experience CAN be attributed to either the other (the
    Object(s)) or to our selves. The mistake of SOM is its strong
    connotation of being the only way to view reality. It can be a beautiful
    worldview in some respects: We are part of a clearly analizable,
    understandable, and neutral world. We are here through some simple, but
    elegant process of natural selection, which is possible through some
    dialogue between Determinism and Chance. Our emotions and ways of
    thinking, our faults, our curiousity etc. are products of natural
    selection. That we now can reflect on nature, including and particularly
    ourselves, holds promise that we can shape nature in better ways
    (through technology and perhaps genetic engineering). Whether we fail or
    succeed, it doesn't really matter, we are just some lucky accident in
    the universe, and nothing will change that, no matter what we do. We
    should be glad that we can experience, for example, love. It's for free,
    or Given by some Chance event.
    In such a way as described above, a subject-object metaphysics can be
    beautiful. But (at least to me), it has some serious negative aspects.
    The most important one, can be described as 'Fear to be all alone'. In
    the closed intellectual net of SOM, we're all 'together alone'. Think of
    hedonism, a spin-off of SOM: even when we're altruistic, we're really
    acting out of desire to feel good about the things we do for others.
    Through reasoning like this we're devalueing our selves. We are not
    supposed to admit it, but Me myself and I (or "Me me mine") is always
    the highest good possible for us in this world. The only thing that's
    worthwile is to please ourselves and gather material wealth and all.
    That's an utterly depressive worldview.
    Robert M. Pirsig, Nishida Kitaro and Danah Zohar (to name the few I'm
    acquainted with) point out that our 'I's aren't ultimate, lonely truths
    as long as we're alive. Doing things for others don't have to pinned
    down to our own selfish desires. The realization that our personality is
    not a concrete thing, but a sort of indeterminate potential, just like
    the world itself is an indeterminate potential, becomes a valid rational
    viewpoint (according to Zohar). I think it's a good thing, just doing
    things according to our nature, according to our perception of values,
    or our BEING value-patterns, with static and dynamic aspects just as and
    end in itself so to say.

    Okay, I stop here- I have to go. Thanks for listening, hope I made some
    sense. Friendly greetings, Pat.

     

    __________________________________________________
    Do you Yahoo!?
    U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
    http://launch.yahoo.com/u2

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 09 2002 - 14:05:47 GMT