From: ian glendinning (psybertron@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Apr 23 2005 - 07:00:55 BST
Scott, Steve,
I used to worry about the apparent rational vs anti-rational and/or
irrational debate.
Zen / Pirsigian MoQ, is not a matter of rejecting rationality, it's a
matter of rejecting "logical-positivism" (or similar) as the only
valid kind of rationality.
So rather than a "Flight From Reason",
we have a "Flight To New Reason"
Ian
On 4/22/05, Scott Roberts <jse885@localnet.com> wrote:
> Steve,
>
> Steve said:
> The reason for my query is to dethrone the myth (at least for myself)
> that Zen is anti-rational. Cleary 'rigorous rationalism' is utilizing
> rationality, so it's not 'anti' rational. But rigorous rationality
> separates rationality itself from the 'objects' of rationality. It is
> this distinction that makes this work, is that no so? And, finally,
> with no objects to discriminate between reasoning self cancels.
> But neither is the intuitionist school anti-rational in the sense that
> reasoning is determined to be bad and a habit to be unlearned. Is that
> not so? Transcending reason does not seem to me abolishing reason.
>
> Scott:
> Zen is not anti-rational in the sense that it says "reason is bad". The
> difference between the two interpretations is whether reason is a
> "skillful means" in gaining Enlightenment. The first option says "yes",
> the second says "no".
> I reject your statement that "rigorous rationality separates rationality
> itself from the 'objects' of rationality". One can start with the
> example of mathematics, where the "object" is the reasoning. The main
> thing in applying "rigorous rationalism" is to reason oneself out of
> believing that the objects of reason have an independent self-existence
> -- the same with the reasoner. It is the assumption (SOM) that reason
> *must* be in subject/object form that leads to the intuitionist view of
> Zen, and which is followed in the MOQ.
>
> - Scott R
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Steve & Oxsana Marquis
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 5:06 PM
> Subject: Re: MD Zen & Reason
>
> Scott wrote:
>
> ___________________
>
> "The nature and history of the ... Koan, for example, is subject to
> great academic controversy, with some researchers claiming it operates
> quite purely in Nagarjuna's mode, viz., a rigorous rationalism whereby
> logic cancels itself out -- leaving devoidness to lapse (slide) by,
> interminably; and others seeing it as operative in a Yogacaric mode, as
> an intuitionism, so the monk does *not* through the assiduous use of
> reason *deduce* self-contradiction, but rather *transcends* reason "in a
> flash"."
> Pirsig is clearly on the side of the latter interpretation, while I
> have been arguing for the former interpretation (which I call employing
> the logic of contradictory identity). But it should be noted that this
> is considerably different from your description:
>
> ___________________
>
> Scott, I apologize for the late response.
>
> My description was a composite of poor memory, several shallow New Age
> books, and the advice of friends who were not active members of any
> meditation 'school' so I wouldn't credit it with representing any
> orthodox view to be sure.
> The reason for my query is to dethrone the myth (at least for myself)
> that Zen is anti-rational. Cleary 'rigorous rationalism' is utilizing
> rationality, so it's not 'anti' rational. But rigorous rationality
> separates rationality itself from the 'objects' of rationality. It is
> this distinction that makes this work, is that no so? And, finally,
> with no objects to discriminate between reasoning self cancels.
> But neither is the intuitionist school anti-rational in the sense that
> reasoning is determined to be bad and a habit to be unlearned. Is that
> not so? Transcending reason does not seem to me abolishing reason.
> It does not make sense!?!? to me to pursue DQ exclusive of static
> latches.
>
> Live well,
>
> 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
>
>
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 : Sat Apr 23 2005 - 07:05:00 BST