From: Dan Glover (daneglover@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun Mar 13 2005 - 02:34:07 GMT
Hello everyone
>From: "Sam Norton" <elizaphanian@kohath.wanadoo.co.uk>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
>Subject: Re: MD Pure experience and the Kantian problematic
>Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:06:46 -0000
>
>It's your chapter 3 that I'm wanting to focus in on. My point is a simple
>one: if mind and matter are seen as the same sort of thing (ontologically)
>then Descartes is still the dominant influence. At least, that is what I
>take from the studies I have made on the matter, and what I take
>Wittgenstein to have established, and what Lash is referring to. Hence I
>was quoting your thesis (p168), where you explicitly state that they ARE
>ontologically identical. (I'm focussing in on this not to split hairs but
>because this seems to be the hinge point that is at issue. It's not
>Pirsig's 'mysticism' - whether that is Eastern or Western or whatever - but
>his metaphysics which is causing difficulties for me. That metaphysics
>seems, to me, to still accept Cartesian presuppositions in the way
>described by Lash, and your thesis usefully highlighted one part of it.)
Hi Sam
I hope you don't mind a couple quick comments while you're waiting for Ant's
reply. I've re-read Chapter 3 of Anthony's PhD thesis and jotted down some
notes, some of which seem worth sharing.
Ontologically speaking, experience is never direct. We derive static quality
patterns of value Dynamically, now, but we experience by remembering the
moment past. If you read carefully, you'll note that Anthony doesn't
actually say mind and matter are identical; he says they can be perceived as
identical. In other words, mind and matter are ontologically derived from
Quality but this doesn't necessarily mean that they are identical beyond the
perception. Otherwise, the table in my mind would become a table materially;
this isn't always a truism.
Now I could be wrong and please feel free to correct me, but it seems that
you're starting with the assumption that there are "things" (matter) out
there perceived by mind -- I think, therefore I am. The MOQ begins with
experience, not pure experience, just experience. Experience is Quality but
remember, Quality isn't a "thing". So "cognito ergo sum" no longer applies.
Thank you for your comments,
Dan
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 : Sun Mar 13 2005 - 02:37:05 GMT