From: ian glendinning (psybertron@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Oct 11 2005 - 15:22:32 BST
That's the difference between us Platt.
You see an argument as an opportunity to join in on one side of a
fight, I see it as an opportunity to find common ground.
Who are you to say which of us understands Pirsig "better", anyway.
Did you ever read Pirsig's Liverpool conference introduction on the
subject of being "fair" ? Just interested.
Ian
On 10/10/05, Platt Holden <pholden@sc.rr.com> wrote:
> Matt:
>
> > DMB said:
> > This is why I think Pirsig and Hayes ARE saying the same thing. They're
> > both talking about an experience in which judgement is absent. I would even
> > go so fat as to say that taking the "undifferentiated aesthetic continuum",
> > the "pure sensation" or "immeditate experience" as a reference to some kind
> > of "valuing" or "judging" is to inappropriately let SOM's subjective self
> > creep back into the conversation.
> >
> > Matt:
> > I'm actually very surprised by this. I think the reading of the hot stove
> > example you just gave is totally wrong. I actually wonder what Paul and
> > Anthony think of your most recent writings about Hayes and Pirsig. Up
> > until a week ago, I thought everyone, even me, agreed on Pirsig's central
> > insight.
> > And not only that, you appear to think what you're saying is normal and
> > not a radical departure from typical readings of Pirsig. I just can't
> > believe any one impressed by Pirsig would say the above. The only thing I
> > can really say is, Why did Pirsig call the ultimate reality Quality (which
> > he uses interchangeably with Value) if what you say is true? It boggles my
> > mind to think that one can have value at the heart of it all without
> > valuing. Touching the stove is not a neutral impression, as you would have
> > it, its a negative experience, a low-Quality situation, as Pirsig says in
> > the very passage in question.
>
> Matt, you are absolutely right, and DMB couldn't be more wrong. There's no
> difference between immediate experience and valuing. I may not be one with
> a walrus, but I'm one with pre-intellectual experience and moral judgment.
> Your explanation of why this is so is dead on. And like you, I thought
> anyone who understood Pirsig would understand this basic premise.
>
> Platt
>
>
>
> 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 : Tue Oct 11 2005 - 23:26:52 BST