From: mark maxwell (laughingpines@yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Tue Nov 22 2005 - 20:56:21 GMT
Hi Mike (Horse and Mark mentioned in a PS)
Mike:
As I see it, the core argument is that the 4th level,
as that which opposes the social level, must consist
of individuals who are not completely bound by the
dictates of society, i.e. autonomous individuals.
Mark:
The social level is filled with autonomous individuals
each fighting for social dominance as autonomous
individual celebrities. Autonomy is central to being a
King for example.
The intellectual level is about intellectual values
which challenge social authority.
Mike:
S[1] is Cartesian Mind and O[1] is Cartesian Matter.
Mark:
There is no social level in this description Mike.
From Anthony McWatt's PhD thesis:
Descartes’ ‘I think therefore I am’ was a historically
shattering declaration
of independence of the intellectual level of evolution
from the social level of
evolution, but would he have said it if he had been a
seventeenth century
Chinese philosopher? If he had been, would anyone in
seventeenth century
China have listened to him and called him a brilliant
thinker and recorded his
name in history? If Descartes had said, ‘The
seventeenth century French
culture exists, therefore I think, therefore I am,’ he
would have been correct.
(Pirsig,1991, p.305)
Skutvik:
Pirsig's position is that all S/O variants we can
dream up have their origin in Logos taking leave of
Mythos.
Mark:
There is no textual support for Skutvik's statement.
The habitual liar is off again Mike.
"The term logos, the root word of "logic," refers to
the sum total of our rational understanding of the
world. Mythos is the sum total of the early historic
and prehistoric myths which preceded the logos. The
mythos includes not only the Greek myths but the Old
Testament, the Vedic Hymns and the early legends of
all cultures which have contributed to our present
world understanding. The mythos-over-logos argument
states that our rationality is shaped by these
legends, that our knowledge today is in relation to
these legends as a tree is in relation to the little
shrub it once was. One can gain great insights into
the complex overall structure of the tree by studying
the much simpler shape of the shrub. There’s no
difference in kind or even difference in identity,
only a difference in size. (ZMM)
Mark:
Mike? See? "There’s no difference in kind or even
difference in identity, only a difference in size
(between Mythos and Logos)
Skutvik:
Pirsig's position is that all S/O variants we can
dream up have their origin in Logos taking leave of
Mythos.
Mark:
Habitual lying.
ZMM cont.
Thus, in cultures whose ancestry includes ancient
Greece, one invariably finds a strong subject-object
differentiation because the grammar of the old Greek
mythos presumed a sharp natural division of subjects
and predicates.
Mark:
Mike? See? "...the grammar of the old Greek mythos
presumed a sharp natural division of subjects and
predicates."
How more freaking clear do you want it Mike? The
Mythos has "sharp natural division of subjects and
predicates" and this is from ZMM, the same ZMM the
liar tells us, "Pirsig's position is that all S/O
variants we can dream up have their origin in Logos
taking leave of Mythos" He's off his head!
ZMM cont.
In cultures such as the Chinese, where
subject-predicate relationships are not rigidly
defined by grammar, one finds a corresponding absence
of rigid subject-object philosophy.
Mark:
Make up your own mind Mike.
Mark
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
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 Nov 22 2005 - 23:31:34 GMT