Re: MD Matt's Critique of the SOL.

From: Joseph Maurer (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Mon Jun 13 2005 - 20:05:08 BST

  • Next message: Allen Barrows: "Re: MD Bolstering Bo's SOL"

    On Monday 13 June 2005 9:30 AM Scott writes to BO

    Scott:
    It is because Pirsig avoids the dilemmas of language that his philosophy is
    inadequate. One must dive into language, equipped with the logic of
    contradictory identity.

    Hi Scott, Bo, and all,

    IMO for something to evolve 3 forces are necessary: +, -, 0 (neutral).
    Pirsig observed in the MOQ DQ(undefined), SQ(defined). Language determines
    the defined, undefined, and language is neutral. Active, Passive, neutral
    are all interchangeable and evolution occurs. DQ, SQ, L of CI, or SOL. It
    seems you are saying something similar, a perennial philosophy.

    Joe

    > Bo,
    >
    > Bo said:
    > "Theory" sounds a bit innocent, no-one has challenged SOM --
    > identified a SOM - before Pirsig. Even Kant started with S/O
    > premises and ended with them. I don't try to outwrite you in
    > philosophy history, but if called upon ;-)
    >
    > Scott:
    > Coleridge and Hegel come to mind.
    >
    > Matt said:
    >> After all, what
    >> is a theory but a string of words and anybody can look into a
    >> dictionary and find that words contain themselves in an innocuous
    >> sense that we can handle.
    >
    > Bo replied:
    > Watch out. Don't come too near the language black hole!
    >
    > Scott:
    > It is because Pirsig avoids the dilemmas of language that his philosophy
    > is
    > inadequate. One must dive into language, equipped with the logic of
    > contradictory identity.
    >
    > Matt said:
    >> It is that particular kind of intellectual
    >> pattern that principally refers to other intellectual patterns, that
    >> kind of pattern we call "philosophy." But in your SOL-MoQ, the
    >> SOL-MoQ itself seems to come to replace reality. But that doesn't
    >> seem to make sense except as a kind of idealism. Not only that, but
    >> it should remind us of Pirsig's snide comment about being handed a
    >> menu without any food.
    >
    > Bo replied:
    > Well, to repeat myself SOM was once taken for granted (and still
    > is by 99,99% of the Western population) Can you Matt show me
    > anyone referring to a subject/object metaphysics , I mean in the
    > sense of it having an origin and maybe a exit?
    >
    > Scott:
    > Barfield's discussion of the decline of original participation and the
    > goal
    > of final participation is just that (origin and exit).
    >
    > Bo continued:
    > There were
    > certainly plenty thinkers who lamented the enigma; why reality
    > was thus divided; why we are locked inside our mind with no
    > hope of knowing the "Ding an Sich", but not putting the bell on
    > the cat like Pirsig did.
    >
    > Scott:
    > Pirsig's belling of the cat fails, due to his failure to come to grips
    > with
    > language and intellect. Barfield succeeds.
    >
    > - Scott
    >
    >
    >

    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 : Mon Jun 13 2005 - 20:08:14 BST