Re: MD People and Value in the MOQ

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Mon Nov 22 2004 - 16:28:55 GMT

  • Next message: mel: "RE: MD Empiricism"

    Sam said:
    > > In Ann 130 above he seems (to me) to be _contrasting_ the MoQ with
    > > Buddhism and science, and says that the 'I' or the 'self' is "a
    > > collection of static patterns capable of apprehending DQ". In other
    > > words, there is a "thing" (ie pattern of value) which corresponds to what
    > > we mean by 'person'.

    > > dmb says:
    > > CONTRASTING the MOQ with science and Buddhism?!? No. He's contrasting the
    > > MOQ with Ayn Rand's Objectivism ....
     
    Sam:
    > So, you are arguing that RMP's position (that the I is "a collection of
    > static patterns capable of apprehending DQ") is the same as the Buddhists
    > (the 'I' is an illusion), and therefore, logically, that "a collection of
    > static patterns capable of apprehending DQ" is an illusion.
    >
    > Remarkable. As the man says, "you are taking an unusual position that may
    > need some defending".

    I agree. This "self is an illusion" business makes no sense. How can
    Pirsig and the Buddhists deny they exist without existing? If Pirsig
    denies that when the "self" of his son died it wasn't real and had no
    effect on "himself," then maybe it's time to call for the guys in the
    white coats again.

    As Sam says, seems to me the people who have a lot of explaining to do are
    those who claim self is figment of imagination, like unicorns, fairies and
    ghosts.

    Platt

    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 Nov 22 2004 - 18:13:08 GMT