From: Steve & Oxsana Marquis (marquis@nccn.net)
Date: Tue Apr 26 2005 - 18:26:38 BST
Scott wrote:
___________________
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.
__________________
Hi Scott. We could around and around a while and I bet what we have is just
misunderstanding, not significant differences. I understand your point that
this method is attempting to get rid of the belief that objects of reason
(and the reasoner) have independent existence. For now you have confirmed my
suspicion.
Ian wrote:
____________
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"
_____________
Yes, logical positivism, the dogma of the archaic Church of Reason. I
certainly concur. So, in keeping with your habit of rejecting either / or
distinctions its rationality AND intuition, not rationality OR intuition.
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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Apr 26 2005 - 22:26:42 BST