From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sat Mar 29 2003 - 21:05:51 GMT
Sam, Rick and all:
Sam said:
I would say that theology is what the religious community says about itself,
comparative religion compares and contrasts theologies, and philosophy of
religion abstracts concepts from theology in order to
analyse them. They're all on the intellectual level.
RICK replied:
I think Pirsig would consider your 'theology' as an aspect of the social
level pattern of 'church' and that when he says 'theology' is an
intellectual pattern he's talking about the objectification of religious
doctrine for study (like sociology, psychology, archeology, entomology).
Here's my evidence... (Rick's selected quote is at the bottom.)
DMB says:
The conversation between you two about the meaning of the word "theology"
was very helpful. I agree with Sam's meaning, "what the religious community
says about itself". As I understand it, theology is the study of the whole
system of doctrines and beliefs that define a particular religion. Its
sectarian by definition. That's exactly why I think it is NOT intellectual.
I don't expect every area of intellectual inquiry to strictly adhere to the
scientific method, but any discipline that begins with the conclusions
violates the most basic of intellectual values.
RICK asked:
Can you point to anything in LILA that might support the notion that Pirsig
is using the terms as you do?
DMB says:
The quote from the SOVD paper has me thinking that Pirsig means "theology"
as Rick has it, as a form of philosophy of religion. Some support from Lila
would be very helpful and even more convincing, but I doubt we'd find it. In
any case, we both agree that there are genuine intellectual approaches to
religion and such, its just that I wouldn't call that theology. Maybe it
really is just a matter of semantics, but I'd really like to hear you make a
case, my theology graduate friend. Does a theology student learn HOW to
think about god, or does a theology student learn WHAT to think about god?
That's a little too simple and too harsh, but you understand the question,
no? Does a theology student learn about god, or how to be a priest?
Obviously, the later requires the former, but I'm asking about the emphasis.
One can become a priest only by way of a theology degree, no? A theology
degree is hardly ever used for anything except to become a priest, no? See
what I'm getting at?
Thanks for your time,
DMB
PIRSIG quote from Rick:
The Metaphysics of Quality associates religious mysticism with Dynamic
Quality, but it would certainly be a mistake to think that the Metaphysics
of Quality endorses the static beliefs of any particular religious sect.
Phaedrus thought sectarian religion was a static *SOCIAL* fallout from
Dynamic Quality and that while some sects had fallen less than others, none
of them told the whole truth (emphasis added).
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 : Sat Mar 29 2003 - 21:07:35 GMT