From: Steve Peterson (peterson.steve@verizon.net)
Date: Fri Nov 26 2004 - 18:21:03 GMT
Hi Scott,
> One can apply the same logic to DQ and SQ, but if one does, one gets
> something different from the treatment of these as given in the MOQ.
> The
> MOQ tends to idolize DQ at the expense of SQ, for example by assuming
> that
> the mystical goal is to experience pure DQ by putting all SQ to sleep.
> But
> the logic of contradictory identity will see that as going off the
> Middle
> Way. DQ and SQ are contradictory identities, so it makes no sense to
> speak
> of "pure [DQ] experience" which is then SQ-ized by intellect. Rather,
> DQ/SQ
> interaction is what makes experience happen.
>
I'm not sure that what you are saying about the logic of contradictory
identity is inconsistent with the MOQ. I think it is a mistake to say
that the MOQ speaks of '"pure [DQ] experience" which is then SQ-ized by
intellect.' Such a role for intellect in creating SQ sounds like Scott
Robert's MOQ rather than Pirsig's. I think the MOQ says that Quality is
pure experience which can be analyzed with a DQ/SQ distinction that
serves better than an objective/subjective one. DQ is not pure
experience but rather the leading edge of experience.
Thanks,
Steve
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 : Fri Nov 26 2004 - 18:24:00 GMT