From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Mon Jan 31 2005 - 10:28:28 GMT
Ron, Platt, Matt DMB n'all ...
Not sure about breakthrough, but at least we're back on page one MoQ
(and out of that morass of political & religious spin of global affairs)
So hail to that.
As you (each) seem to go on to say, in my own words ...
This is very (approximately) "pragmatic" and suggests Pirsig was
re-organising existing thought into a useful framework, rather than
inventing something entirely new.
After some words about the significance of "new physics" in bringing to the
attention of the world a hundred years ago that "objectivity is overrated",
in the next thread, Ron you make a statement using the words "xxxx is
relegated to mere subjectivity". This is the crux for me.
The problem is the words - relegated and mere - say that subjectivity is
somehow inferior, showing the toxic meme of objectivity is preserved in
usage. MoQ was (is) the antidote to that way of thinking - all experiences
are interactions between S & O, and its the interactions that matter.
Neither O nor S is the more important.
Interestingly, I'm reading Searle's latest "Mind" at the moment and he is
promoting "observer dependent subjectivity and qualitativeness".
Some hope for mainstream philosophy ?
Ian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Platt Holden" < >
To: < >; < >
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 4:12 PM
Subject: Re: MD Pure experience and the Kantian problematic
> Hi Ron, All:
>
> Two breakthrough thoughts in your brilliant post:
>
> " There is nothing to be experienced except for experience itself."
>
> and
>
> "DQ does not exist after the fact; after it is experienced."
>
> For those who missed it, here's Ron's complete commentary:
>
> Platt
>
>
>> The reason I feel it leaves too much unsettled is that before Quantum
>> Physics, Western Philosophy would not consider anything that was not
>> object
>> related. There is a separation of mind and matter, and mind can only
>> experience matter; anything that is not matter was unreal.
>>
>> What was once scientific certainty is now uncertain. Once we split the
>> atom, and started trying to defince the objects within the atom, we
>> realized it is not all object at all. Our best 'guess'-timation of what
>> we
>> view is only that; a guess. We view what is an object, but doesn't remain
>> an object. Particles and waves do a dance that is unpredictable, and the
>> particles and waves do not even remain particles and waves; particles
>> become waves, and waves, particles.
>>
>> Both the subject and object are creations of the mind, and the mind is
>> not
>> separate from matter, so there is nothing to be experienced except for
>> experience itself. There is no object that we focus on, and there is not
>> subject prior to experience. As opposed to mind and/or matter, Quality
>> (Value) is is the fundamental element of reality. The mind is no more
>> than
>> an evolutionary advancement, and intellect is part of this evolutionary
>> advancement. We do not create our world by thinking about it, our world
>> creates our thinking. When I say world, I do not mean earth and rivers,
>> but
>> grains of sand to stars, or particles to the black hole, or waves that
>> extend to the furthest reaches of the universe.
>>
>> This is where nothingness comes in. When you strip away the ego and the
>> cultural beliefs, there is nothing left. This is when we experience; pure
>> (raw) experience. This is our mysticism; it is our letting go of the
>> tired
>> old beliefs that leave us wanting, and needing to justify our thoughts to
>> that of others who have gone before us. Our beliefs are what keeps us
>> needy, but we search for reality by asking those who made us needy to
>> begin
>> with. Pure experience does not come from an effort to understand, but
>> from
>> reality itself. We just have to open up to it.
>>
>> DQ and SQ are not separate in an S/O world, as there would be no DQ. Once
>> DQ is experienced, it is then SQ; the very moment you experience it. To
>> try
>> to put it into Kantian terms, SQ is S/O; DQ does not exist after the
>> fact;
>> after it is experienced. S/O just points to the experience DQ provided,
>> which now is real in our thinking, but was never unreal; just our
>> thinking
>> was unreal.
>>
>> Anyone interested, let me know how bad I screwed this up.
>
>
>
> 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 -
>
> 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 -
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 Jan 31 2005 - 11:06:29 GMT