Re: andsRe: MD Two Theses in the MOQ

From: ian glendinning (psybertron@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Nov 28 2005 - 12:09:43 GMT

  • Next message: gav: "Re: MD Quality, DQ and SQ"
  • Next message: ian glendinning: "Re: MD Quality, subjectivity and the 4th level"

    Hi DM,

    Yes, I think that's pretty clear.
    I like your phrase "SQ becomes object-like" - kinda sums it up.

    It adds to the debate about subjectivity in layers 3 and 4 - the SPQ
    in these layers become object-like subjects, though no doubt Scott and
    Bo would accuse us of trying to force MoQ into an S/O world view.

    Ian

    On 11/27/05, David M <davidint@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
    > Guys
    >
    > The hot stove thing. Is it not obvious that reflex
    > actions are a form of SQ, i.e. something DQ laid down
    > along time ago about the value-quality of hot surfaces coming
    > into contact with merely warm bottoms? The whole point
    > of SQ is that it becomes object-like, unconscious, mechanistic,
    > and that the oldest SQ is what we refer to as matter. So that
    > what is now matter-form is the SQ that DQ laid down longest ago
    > for the quality-value-reasons that were available at that level/time.
    > SQ is what we might call fixed-values or values-frozen into matter
    > or behaviour. Some SQ of course can be changed by becoming open
    > to DQ and quality choices once again.
    >
    > DM
    >
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: "Platt Holden" <pholden@sc.rr.com>
    > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>; <owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk>
    > Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 2:42 PM
    > Subject: RE: MD Two Theses in the MOQ
    >
    >
    > > Paul:
    > >
    > > Thanks for explaining your position on some of the questions I asked. It
    > > appears our differences boil down to a single key idea that you set up as
    > > follows:
    > >
    > >> I think judgement implies an element of reflection or consideration . . .
    > >
    > > Contrast this to Pirsig's description of knowing the value of a situation
    > > without any reflection or consideration:
    > >
    > > "Any person of any philosophic persuasion who sits on a hot stove will
    > > verify without any intellectual argument whatsoever that he is in an
    > > undeniably low-quality situation: that the value of his predicament is
    > > negative. This low quality is not just a vague, woolly-headed, crypto-
    > > religious, metaphysical abstraction. It is an experience: It is not a
    > > judgment about an experience. It is not a description of experience. The
    > > value itself is an experience." (Lila, 5)
    > >
    > > Note particularly Pirsig's caution, "It is not a judgment about an
    > > experience." Yet, the individual "knows" (without judging) that the
    > > situation is low quality.
    > >
    > > Here then is the crux of my confusion. It seems I can know I'm having a
    > > low quality experience without making a value judgment, i.e., I'm able to
    > > instantly evaluate a situation without thinking.
    > > .
    > > To put it another way, art critic Clement Greenberg describes the esthetic
    > > experience: "Esthetic enjoyments are immediate, intuitive, undeliberate
    > > and involuntary leaving not room for conscious application of standards,
    > > criteria, rules or precepts."
    > >
    > > I've always felt that Greenberg and Pirsig were describing the same
    > > phenomenon.
    > >
    > >> Paul: I think your confusion comes from conflating Dynamic 'value' with
    > >> static 'value judgements'.
    > >
    > > Indeed, that may be the problem. Do you see experiencing Dynamic 'value'
    > > the same as Greenberg describes the aesthetic experience?
    > >
    > > Thanks.
    > >
    > > 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
    >
    >

    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 Nov 28 2005 - 13:05:39 GMT