From: Scott R (jse885@spinn.net)
Date: Tue Nov 04 2003 - 02:12:35 GMT
David,
By "natural attitude" (I think the phrase is Husserl's, albeit in
translation) I am referreing to what is also called naive realism. How we
think about things before we learn any philosophy.
- Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: "David MOREY" <us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: MD Self-consciousness
> Scott
>
> A natural attitude? Not sure about primitive man,
> what about magic, participatory thinking, animalism?
>
> Surely identity begins when we say here I am there is
> not-me. But prior to that is unity/Oneness which is
> what Pirsig means by quality?
>
> DM
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott R" <jse885@spinn.net>
> To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 12:21 AM
> Subject: Re: MD Self-consciousness
>
>
> > David,
> >
> > The difference in seeming needs no unpacking. It is the "natural
> attitude".
> > I think, to praraphrase Nagel, that there is something that it is like
to
> be
> > me, and that something is different from my experience of rocks and
trees.
> >
> > The question I am presenting to the MOQ is: does the MOQ explain these
two
> > seemings? My answer is no. It assumes one and ignores the other.
> >
> > I said you missed the point because I was simply noting that in the
> natural
> > attitude there are two seemings. You then went on at length how
> > philosophically, one can put these seemings into question. Of course one
> > can, but my point is that the MOQ does so in a way that simply denies
one
> of
> > them, whereas I think one shouldn't do that. Instead, I recommend
treating
> > them as a contradictory identity.
> >
> > - Scott
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David MOREY" <us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk>
> > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 3:26 PM
> > Subject: Re: MD Self-consciousness
> >
> >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > > You're missing mine. I want you to unpack the distinction because
> > > I cannot see how you can justify it. But maybe we are using terms
> > > differently, if you unpack it, maybe I can understand what you are
> > > doing wrong, or understand what I have got wrong.
> > >
> > > regards
> > > David M
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Scott R" <jse885@spinn.net>
> > > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> > > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 5:10 PM
> > > Subject: Re: MD Self-consciousness
> > >
> > >
> > > > David,
> > > >
> > > > You're missing my point here. Yes the me/not-me distinction needs a
> LOT
> > of
> > > > unpacking, but first it has to be acknowledged, and it is that
initial
> > > > acknowledgment that I see Pirsig as avoiding in his eagerness to
> unpack
> > > SOM,
> > > > and so throwing a contradictory baby out with the bathwater.
> > > >
> > > > - Scott
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "David MOREY" <us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk>
> > > > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> > > > Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2003 2:13 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: MD Self-consciousness
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Scott
> > > > >
> > > > > This is interesting because unusually I disagree with you.
> > > > >
> > > > > Scott: By "inside" and "outside" I am referring to the fact that
in
> > > sense
> > > > > > perception I experience things that seem to be not me, while in
> > > thinking
> > > > > I
> > > > > > experience things that seem to be me. Pirsig does not pay
> attention
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > > > existence of those two very different kinds of seeming, in
effect
> > > > assuming
> > > > > > that one (sense perception) is basic, and the other an illusion
> > (note
> > > > that
> > > > > I
> > > > > > am referring to the *seeming* as illusory, not the actual
> thinking).
> > > > Hence
> > > > > > my accusation of nominalism, and that by ignoring the two types
of
> > > > seeming
> > > > > > he is not being empirical.
> > > > >
> > > > > David M: I think this me/not-me distinction needs unpacking. There
> is
> > > > > certainly
> > > > > a distinction between what I can will to respond/have agency with
> all
> > > the
> > > > > time,
> > > > > i.e. my body, but my car can also start to feel like a body when I
> > drive
> > > > it
> > > > > so much.
> > > > > People with artificial limbs controlled by brain waves have
> certainly
> > > > > reported feeling
> > > > > like they became part of their body, and in a way we can gain
agency
> > > over
> > > > > anything
> > > > > in our environment with the necessary energy/tools. Sure you can
lay
> > > cliam
> > > > > to your thoughts
> > > > > but I often feel like they are something that flow through me and
> are
> > > > > connected in ways
> > > > > that I cannot entirely account for in terms of any sort of
> > progression.
> > > It
> > > > > seems hard to say that
> > > > > we cause thinking or if thinking just happens to us, is thinking
> ours
> > or
> > > > is
> > > > > it a gift from out
> > > > > of nothing/transcendence? I certainly see thinking/perception as
> > > entirely
> > > > > enmeshed, do you
> > > > > really think Pirsig gives priority to perception?
> > > > > Quality=reality=expereience. And this is as much stuff-in-the-
> > > > > world as it is stuff-in-your-head. Head-experience-world are
pretty
> > > > > inseperable I suggest.
> > > > > Sure, Pirsig has a go about thinking as reasoning, becuase a lot
of
> > what
> > > > we
> > > > > experience is very
> > > > > spontaneous and has little to do with deliberating-thinking. But I
> > think
> > > > the
> > > > > whole of perception/the body
> > > > > exhibit vast amounts of intelligence, otherwise of course you
would
> > not
> > > > see
> > > > > a thing. Merleau-Ponty is
> > > > > very very good on this. I think your argument with Pirsig is
because
> > > > > sometimes he is using a narrow
> > > > > sense of thinking as theory-deliberate-thinking and you want to
talk
> > > about
> > > > > the broader intelligence-perception-
> > > > > thinking. Surely primitive man has onlt the one type of
> > > > > particpatory-seeming, and this is what Pirsig is getting
> > > > > at when he says quality, quality begins with primordial
> > > non-distinguished
> > > > > reality, pretty hard for any of us
> > > > > to get with thse days, deep meditation seems the best way,
dropping
> > all
> > > > your
> > > > > presuppositions is very hard,
> > > > > Heidegger, for me, pushes hardest in this direction.
> > > > >
> > > > > regards
> > > > > David M
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Scott R" <jse885@spinn.net>
> > > > > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> > > > > Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 5:51 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: MD Self-consciousness
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > David,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Scott (I think):Nevertheless, this attitude seems to me to
more
> > than
> > > a
> > > > > > > little
> > > > > > > nominalist, since it looks to that which comes from the
outside
> as
> > > > > > > privileged over that which comes from the inside.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What is this outside/inside distinction,
> > reality=quality=experience
> > > > > > > we experience, there is no inside or outside, it is
outsideless.
> > > > > > > We can create a theoretical cosmic story but we can not
> > > > > > > experience anything outside of experience, I suggest, pretty
> > > > > > > obvious really.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > By "inside" and "outside" I am referring to the fact that in
sense
> > > > > > perception I experience things that seem to be not me, while in
> > > thinking
> > > > > I
> > > > > > experience things that seem to be me. Pirsig does not pay
> attention
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > > > existence of those two very different kinds of seeming, in
effect
> > > > assuming
> > > > > > that one (sense perception) is basic, and the other an illusion
> > (note
> > > > that
> > > > > I
> > > > > > am referring to the *seeming* as illusory, not the actual
> thinking).
> > > > Hence
> > > > > > my accusation of nominalism, and that by ignoring the two types
of
> > > > seeming
> > > > > > he is not being empirical.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Scott
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 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
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 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
>
>
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 Nov 04 2003 - 02:14:45 GMT