From: Joseph Maurer (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Wed Nov 10 2004 - 19:51:58 GMT
On 9 November 2004 8:45 Ham writes to Joe:
[joe] hi Ham! I'm joe. I had occasion to go to your website as Aristotle's
proposal of 'essence' is what I grew up with. Morality is an odd subject! I
want to identify the DQ of each level that Pirsig proposes, and maybe see
why one level is higher than the other. For the social level I can see
'existence' (order) as DQ. I agree with you that the "Primary attribute of
Existence is not Being but difference."
[Ham] That's probably the limit of our agreement, since I have no particular
interest in parsing the made-made DQ levels which seem to be of special
significance to MOQers. Evolution, like all progressions in nature, takes
place in the differentiated space/time dimensions. As far as Essence is
concerned, the time sequence is of no importance. From the existential
perspective, natural science provides all I need to know about how things
evolve. It's much like the question as to which came first, the chicken or
the egg? Besides, I have yet to be persuaded that Quality creates it all
Hi Ham and all,
Thank you! for your 'Good luck on your project, anyway.' My thinking comes
from being a singing plumber. I think I have a practical turn of mind. I
want to express my personal experience as I was taught to interpret it. I
act upon "a universe constructed to my idealized fancy" I do not think I can
do otherwise. If I understand the word experience, I accept that 'fancy' is
human.
Does metaphysics cover essence and ethics? It is hard to know what "man-made
DQ levels" mean. I see existence as order in a moral sense. I compare it to
your insight that existence is 'difference'. In each case existence is not
being. 'Difference' and 'order' are not identical.
IMO it is a wrong analogy to relate 'evolution' and 'progressions in nature'
to action in space/time. IMO I live in space/time, I evolve outside of time.
When I was a child I thought as a child.
I eat (feed). I have a 'purpose' beyond gravity. I am trying to get Nature
to line up to my personal wishes. I do not communicate well with dogma.
Perhaps, we have the same wishes and can understand each other.
Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: <hampday@earthlink.net>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 5:48 PM
Subject: Re: MD On Transcendence
>
> From: Ham Priday
> To: Joseph Maurer
> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 8:45 PM
> Subject: Re: MD On Transcendence
>
>
> Hi, Joe --
>>
>> [Ham] MOQ does not provide us with a
>> transcendent reality, it only pretends to. Since I don't want to be
>> responsible for keeping Chuck up at night, I'll admit that I may have
>> used
>> the word in an earlier posting. It also appeared in the Amazon
> intervewer's
>> opening question to Sam Harris (referred to in the "terror & religion"
> thread):
>> "Obviously there's something in the makeup of humans that impels them
>> toward a belief in a transcendent being."
>>
>> [Joe] I had occasion to go to your website as Aristotle's
>> proposal of 'essence' is what I grew up with. Morality is an odd subject!
> I
>> want to identify the DQ of each level that Pirsig proposes, and maybe see
>> why one level is higher than the other. For the social level I can see
>> 'existence' (order) as DQ. I agree with you that the "Primary attribute
>> of
>> Existence is not Being but difference."
>
> That's probably the limit of our agreement, since I have no particular
> interest in parsing the made-made DQ levels which seem to be of special
> significance to MOQers. Evolution, like all progressions in nature, takes
> place in the differentiated space/time dimensions. As far as Essence is
> concerned, the time sequence is of no importance. From the existential
> perspective, natural science provides all I need to know about how things
> evolve. It's much like the question as to which came first, the chicken
> or
> the egg? Besides, I have yet to be persuaded that Quality creates it
> all.
>>
>> IMO Evolution proceeds from the inorganic level. Gravity is the DQ of the
>> inorganic level. If "the divine one is a negation of negations" does that
>> mean that if I see 'purpose' (feeding) as DQ of the organic level that it
> is
>> only a negation of 'gravity'?
> [Joe, there may be a typo here (feeding?), but I doubt if I would
> understand
> your question in any case.]
>
>> I want to see gravity composed of three forces
>> made manifest by evolution in a moral order, to organic, to social, to
>> intellectual. What differentiates the negations? More? Stronger? and
>> where
>> does this come from in gravity? Why would the intellectual level which
>> has
>> the weakest negation from gravity be the last to manifest in evolution,
> yet
>> be the highest level?
>
> Sorry, I can't help you here. It sounds like you're trying to get Nature
> to
> line up to your personal wishes. I'm an Essentialist, but there's still
> enough science in my thinking to realize that one must have empirical
> support for theories having to do with the material world. Without it
> you're simply theorizing a universe constructed to your idealized fancy.
> And that's not metaphysics or philosophy.
>
> Good luck on your project, anyway. I'm sure you'll get more encouragement
> from other members of the group.
>>
> Regards,
> Ham
>>
>>
>
>
>
> 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 : Wed Nov 10 2004 - 21:32:54 GMT