Re: MD MoQ platypuses

From: August West (augustwestd@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Sep 02 2003 - 15:11:49 BST

  • Next message: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com: "Re: MD Where things end."

    Platt, Squonk, All

    > So instead of thinking "something implies a subject
    > and a object,"
    > think "something implies static patterns of value."

    Isn't it like this:

    something implies static patterns of value

    something also implies subject/ object?

    I say this because:

    If I percieve something this implies "me" and
    "something"; a subject and an object. The whole time
    we are looking for quality we are looking for
    something whether its a feeling or something physical.
     Quality isn't and cannot be nothing, it has quanity.
    In existance you are something or you are nothing.
    Pirsig, I think was right when he said quality is
    undefineable.

    There may be static patterns of value in the mind, but
    so what, you can't define it because subjects and
    objects have different values to different people (at
    different times in their lives).

    "Us and them, who can deny its what the fighting's all
    about"
    -Pink Floyd

    Us, subject
    them, object
    fighting, dynamic quality

    I think that this works much better, subject/object,
    is the static here.

    Just wondering, I've always felt there was something
    wrong with the MOQ and I'm testing new things, which
    is my purpose on this list. I don't have a huge beef
    with Pirsig, I'm just like the cat, I love the high
    country of the mind. I'm minus a motorcycle thou, I
    prefer a Caddy, easier on the body makes for easier on
    the mind.
    Thoughts?

    -August

    --- SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com wrote:

    > Hi August,
    >
    > > How can you think of something without a
    > > subject/object correlation? As soon as there is
    > > something there is quality, and either subjects or
    > > objects or both, as something implies a subject
    > and
    > > and object. I think this is my biggest "beef" with
    > > Pirsig. SOM is intertwinded with quality.
    >
    > In the MOQ, all thoughts are static patterns of
    > value. Before there is
    > "something" to think about, there is Quality.
    > Quality cannot be called
    > "something" because it is beyond all names and
    > labels. It is ineffable.
    >
    > Quality has two components--not subject and
    > object--but Dynamic and
    > static. The Dynamic component is pure experience,
    > prior to any
    > thoughts, labels and names whatsoever. The static
    > component, at the
    > intellectual level of our experience, consists of
    > static thought
    > patterns including the pattern of subject/object.
    >
    > The subject/object division is one of several
    > possible static thought
    > patterns. The Dynamic/static division that the MOQ
    > uses is a better
    > static thought pattern because it explains our
    > experience better than
    > the S/O pattern, as Pirsig explains:
    >
    > "The Metaphysics of Quality can explain
    > subject-object relationships
    > beautifully but, as Phaedrus had seen in
    > anthropology, a subject-object
    > metaphysics can't explain values worth a damn. It
    > has always been a
    > mess of unconvincing psychological gibberish when it
    > tries to explain
    > values." (Lila, Chap. 8)
    >
    > So instead of thinking "something implies a subject
    > and a object,"
    > think "something implies static patterns of value."
    >
    > We're taught from earliest childhood that the world
    > is divided into
    > subjects and objects, opinions and facts, mind and
    > matter, etc. These
    > divisions come from our Western intellectual
    > heritage going all the way
    > back to ancient Greece. So it's terribly hard to
    > think of these
    > divisions as being anything other than "natural" and
    > "right." The
    > problem is these divisions gives us no clue as to
    > why they are "right."
    > Indeed, they give no clue as to what is "right" in
    > any aspect of life.
    >
    > The MOQ provides us with new intellectual patterns
    > to help us answer
    > the question of "Why is it right?"
    >
    > Platt
    >
    > Platt and August,
    > This is a much better explanation than mine.
    > All the best,
    > squonk
    >

    __________________________________
    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
    http://sitebuilder.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 Sep 02 2003 - 15:14:47 BST