From: Case (Case@iSpots.com)
Date: Mon Sep 12 2005 - 17:49:15 BST
[Platt wrote]
> Since the beginning of the MD there's been lots of references to
> experience, awareness, sensation, perception, feeling, consciousness, etc.
> -- words that as far as I know have never been agreed upon as to their
> meaning. Something the individuals in this group might constructively do
> would be to agree on the precise meaning of such terms. By doing so,
> better mutual understanding would likely result.
>
> I'll start by defining "pure experience" as Pirsig does:"The Metaphysics
> of Quality says pure experience is value. Experience which is not valued
> is not experienced. The two are the same." (Lila, 29)
>
> The question for all is: Shall we accept the definition of "experience"
> the same as Pirsig's definition of "pure experience, i.e., "experience is
> value?" I vote Yes.
[Case replies}
Excellent suggestion Platt. I would vote yes to the first one just to have
us move on to defining Value. But I suspect that finding agreement on those
terms would be impossible. They all have different meanings in different
fields and some have resisted definition for about the last 2300 years. I
would suggest rather that we just thrown them all out. They generate more
heat than light.
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 Sep 12 2005 - 17:54:38 BST