From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun Mar 23 2003 - 02:59:14 GMT
Scott, Sam and all:
Scott said:
Christianity calls God three-in-one, and in the MOQ there is Quality/DQ/SQ.
Both triples are very important in that it prevents one from objectifying
the central "concept" of their respective metaphysics. The Catholic
magisterium (what the bishops in council decide on doctrinally speaking) was
very careful to declare as heresy an interpretation of the trinity as
polytheism (there are three gods) or modalism (there are three aspects to
God). In other words, if you think you understand the trinity, you are
wrong. This is not mythical thinking, but very careful intellectual
activity. As I've suggested before, it can only be approached (but still not
understood) with the logic of contradictory identity. The same goes for
approaching Quality, DQ, and SQ. What I would *not* do, though, is try to
align the MOQ triple with the Christian. My point, though, is to agree with
Sam that Christian theology is a thoroughly intellectual activity.
DMB says:
The trinity "prevents one from objectifying the central concept of their
respective metaphyics"? The trinity is the result of "very careful
intellectual activity", but can't be understood, only "approached" "with the
logic of contradictory identity"? Forgive me, but that absoulutely requires
some kind of explanation. Sounds like a load of bullshit to me, but I'll
keep an open mind. Please, tell me the intellectual meaning of the trinity.
Show me how theology is intellectual. I've been trying to explain exactly
how and why it isn't, but that is really much harder, to show or prove what
something isn't. Its like trying to prove that you don't beat your wife or
have weapons of mass destruction. ;-)
Scott said:
Maybe Pirsig holds with this (I can't remember his mentioning original sin),
but if so I would say he is wrong as well. Original sin is the state of
being *cut off* from Quality, which -- if one has faith in Quality -- should
tell one that one is insane (out of touch with Reality). Hence I have
adopted the phrase "ironic metaphysics", to constantly remind myself of the
contingency of any formulation I might adopt. Becoming sane is, of course,
mystical awakening. Without that, one's social and intellectual activity is
always to some extent off track.
DMB says:
Don't remember the mention of "original sin"? Well, that's why I included
the quote, which used the phrase three times. (I said it was from chapter
24, but its actually from chapter 21.)
"Suddenly we have come full circle at the American culture's founders, the
Puritans, and their overwhelming concern with 'original sin' ..."
"The mythology by which they explained this original sin seems no longer
useful in a scientific world,..."
"When we look at the things in their contemporary society they
identified with this original sin we see something remarkable."
Aside from that, I understand the "cut off from God" doctrine and can even
see how that could be translated into the MOQ, but I think this is mysticism
and not mythology or theology. But "becoming sane is a mystical awakening"
doesn't make sense to me. I thought sanity was about having the same static
patterns as those around you, while the mystical experience was a vacation
from all that, no static at all. So, your comment defies my understanding of
two key MOQ concepts; sanity and mysticism.
Thanks for your time,
DMB
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 : Sun Mar 23 2003 - 03:00:47 GMT