From: hampday@earthlink.net
Date: Mon Aug 16 2004 - 20:44:20 BST
Ham to Mark Steven Heyman, Monday, August 16
Subject: Re: MD Metaphysics of Value
> msh said:
> In response to Ham's contention that his concept of Immanent Essence
> is an original metaphysical contribution, I pasted his thesis into
> my word processor and replaced "Immanent Essence" with "Dynamic
> Quality"; I also replaced the single word "immanent" with "dynamic"
> and the single word "Essence" with "Quality." For those of us
> familiar with the MOQ, this results in NO significant change in
> meaning. I invite others to perform the same replacement and see if
> they agree.
>
> ham replied:
> That's a fascinating way to analyze a thesis, and it avoids having to
> read it for the meaning intended. ...
> For example, the word "immanent" (meaning "in the mind" as opposed to
> "in the objective world") does not relate in any way to "dynamic"
> (continuously active or changing), nor should it need to.
>
> msh responded:
> This is what I mean about using dictionary definitions. In the MOQ,
> "dynamic" means much more than just "active" or "changing." Quality
> is Dynamic in the instant of experience, before conceptualization. It
> is at this point that DQ becomes immanent, in your sense
> Mark, we all tend to read things that are not really there into essays in
> their original form; why should we assume that these errors won't be
> compounded when the essays are doctored up by PC tricks?
< I'm amazed by what seems to me an obsessive effort to "force fit" my
< thesis into the MOQ mold, including its "unconventional" word definitions
< and its cavalier dismissal of logic when it invalidates the author's
conclusions.
< As a relative newcomer here, I would be interested in how other Pirsig
< loyalists justify such practices.
>
> ham had said:
> I am not an atheist, and would not object to being called a "theist"
> if this were an accurate label. Runes Dictionary defines "theism" as "a
> conception of God as a unitary being"; inasmuch as I consider
> "beingness" a construct of man's mind that separates him from the
> ultimate reality, I reject the notion that it applies to Essence.
>
> msh now says:
> I don't understand. Are you saying that Essence is the ultimate
> reality, but that it doesn't exist? How else should we interpret the
> idea that Beingness doesn't apply to Essence?
>
> Ham responds:
> Perhaps you didn't read my thesis carefully enough to catch my meaning.
> Nearly half of this document is an attempt to put down the notion of
> "being" as the essence of reality in philosophy, science, religion, and
> human affairs. In the Creation section I also said: "If Essence is a
> priori, and existence is limited to phenomena that occur in time and
> space, then it is illogical to say that Essence exists. Essence is the
Source
> of finite experience, not an existent." Things that exist to experience
are
> intellectualized as having being"; that is to say, beingness is a
construct of
> the finite mind rather than a "property" of Essence. (I think others may
> have missed this point, too, as no one has challenged me on it.) There
> are numerous philosophies of Beingness, both dual and non-dual. Apart
> from the Greek Idealists, however, few if any recognize Essence as the
> a priori Source. Hence the title: Philosophy of Essence.
>
> You can add this to your log of "(possible) original ideas in Ham's
> thesis", Mark. :-) And I'll close with a question to you. Does Mr.
Pirsig
> regard Quality as a form of beingness, as being itself, as a Being, or as
> something else entirely? If Quality is not "being", then why haven't you
> raised the same question about Quality that you ask about Essence?.
>
> Essentially,
> Ham
>
> "Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is
> everything." -- Henri Poincare'
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward -
http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 : Mon Aug 16 2004 - 21:46:56 BST