From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Fri May 30 2003 - 17:51:45 BST
Scott,
> I may be misunderstanding you here. If you are saying that I am saying that
> lack of self-existence is a characteristic of concepts, then no, I am not
> saying that. I am saying it is a characteristic of everything. My concept
> of an amoeba lacks self-existence, and so does the amoeba itself.
The smell of a rose, the taste of chocolate, the beauty of a sunset all
exist in a realm beyond concepts. You can no more describe the smell of
rose than explain what it's like to be an amoeba. Some experiences are too
much for words.
All we verbalize is perceived first as high, neutral or low value, then
secondarily, in its briefest symbolic verbal form, as in "Ahhh," "Ho
Hum," and "Oh no." Concepts such as "characteristic," "self-existence,"
and "amoeba" are derivatives of our first hand experience of value.
At least that's the message I get from the MoQ and others, like the
following from English physicist, Arthur Eddington:
"We have two kinds of knowledge which I call symbolic knowledge and
intimate knowledge . . . The more customary forms of reasoning have been
developed for symbolic knowledge only. The intimate knowledge will not
submit to codification and analysis; or, rather, when we attempt to
analyze it the intimacy is lost and it is replaced by symbolism."
> > The MoQ allows both worlds, non-contingent mystic and contingent
> > symbolic, to complement one another simultaneously. If a metaphysics
> > hangs just on words like "contingency" and slights or ignores the Tao
> > which cannot be conveyed either by words or by silence but is understood
> > by direct experience, then that metaphysics is incomplete.
> Yes, except if you add the Tao, you are still incomplete, because you now
> have a dualist metaphysics (and a temptation to idolize the TAO). Hence,
> the Buddhists say "Nirvana is samsara", or the Tao *is* the contingency. So
> in a completed MoQ, somehow, DQ is SQ (while also not SQ). Hence my
> interest in the logic of contradictory identity.
Logic is bound to the symbolic world, as is metaphysics. But I believe a
metaphysics that acknowledges the realm of knowable but inexplicable is a
better metaphysics than one that insists all existence consists of
language, context, symbolism, semantics, relativism, etc.
> I'm also bothered by the Pirsig quote. While it is obvious that one cannot
> eat the menu, it is not obvious (to me) that metaphysics is not the
> reality. While it makes sense to say that "there is a waterhole on the
> other side of the ridge" is a statement about something, with metaphysics I
> think one needs a different kind of semantics. A metaphysical system is, in
> my opinion, more like a huge definition. It is an attempt to create a
> language game. Of course, I am here trying to change the meaning of
> 'metaphysics', and so how it is done. (I also object to the quote in that
> it retains the SOM-ish privileging of "reality" over language. I do not
> assume that the other levels form the basis of the intellectual level, and
> so are in some way more real.)
Agree. But I think what is "privileged" (a prerequisite) over language and
all else is not the other levels but the reality of Dynamic Quality ". . .
the source of all things, completely simple and always new."
Of course in communicating with one another by language we're compelled to
get involved in contexts, language, definitions, narratives and all that,
a world where nothing can stand alone because it's all bits and pieces,
nouns, adjectives, verbs, etc. floating in fields of one sort or another,
sentences, paragraphs, articles, etc. But to claim that's all there is
chops experience down to what is said and read, and leaves the beauty of
sunsets to amoebas and other critters. I don't begrudge their pleasure,
but expect to get my fair share, too.
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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 30 2003 - 17:52:59 BST