From: Paul Turner (paulj.turner@ntlworld.com)
Date: Tue Mar 09 2004 - 15:06:12 GMT
Hi Chris
Chris said:
...when was the last time you experienced a level?
Paul:
When was the last time you experienced a liquid?
Chris said:
It would be a very messy world if 'Plato' did not inhere in our genes.
This fixation enables us to understand, no doubts there.
Paul:
Firstly, I don't think Plato's "Ideas" and "ideas" are in any way
synonymous. Oriental understanding comes from the "genes" of the Vedas
and Upanishads where the notion of transcendent Forms is absent, yet use
is made of ideas nonetheless. The major difference is that Plato
considered it possible and desirable for human intellect to (re)discover
the underlying Truth of reality conceptually; the Eastern philosophies
thought it was impossible and undesirable. Compare these two passages:
"... a human being must understand speech in terms of general forms,
proceeding to bring many perceptions together into reasoned unity. That
process is the recollection of the things our soul saw when it was
travelling with god, when it disregarded the things we now call real and
lifted up its head to what is truly real instead." [Plato, Phaedrus
249c]
"The way is forever nameless.
Though the uncarved block is small
No one in the world dare claim its allegiance.
.only when it is cut are there names.
As soon as there are names
One ought to know that it is time to stop." [Tao Te Ching, XXXII]
Chris said:
My problem lies in making the levels transcendental or transcendent, the
latter more likely to occur these days. I want people to realise that
there are large parts of the world where people indeed do not have seven
days in a week so that it is very unlikely that these levels say more
than what one man has to say about, philosophologilising(oef?) Pirsig
seems to be a general trend here.
Paul:
Compare both of the passages above with this statement from Pirsig:
"The Dynamic reality that goes beyond words is the constant focus of Zen
teaching. Because of their habituation to a world of words, philosophers
often do not understand Zen. When philosophers have trouble
understanding the distinction between static and Dynamic Quality it can
be because they are trying to include and subordinate all Quality to
thought patterns. The distinction between static and Dynamic Quality is
intended to block this." (Pirsig, 1997e)
I think it is clear that Pirsig is not attempting or endorsing any
"fixation" of reality in transcendent ideas as Plato did but is closer
to the thinking behind the Tao Te Ching.
Regarding the MOQ being no more than, "what one man has to say," the
same can ultimately be said of gravity, evolution, radiotherapy,
electricity, combustion, enlightenment, nothingness, earth, the solar
system etc and, whilst it may be important not to forget this, saying
"no more than" seems to imply there is a possibility of a description
being *more than* "what one man has to say," which makes me question
what is gained from such a statement.
Chris said:
Contingency is characterised by insecurity and instability
Paul:
Then we are confusing our definitions. I would say contingency is
characterised by being dependent and provisional. In the case of the MOQ
static levels, they are dependent on e.g. the limits of language and on
the quality of the theory of evolution, amongst other things. Pirsig
clearly states in Lila that they are also provisional.
Paul previously said:
>I think people have their own idea about what types of experience the
>levels define, that's all. I believe "scientists" still argue about
what
>is dead or alive. Also, I think people sometimes make the mistake of
>trying to assign things entirely to one level or another.
Chris said:
They have their own ideas of what types of experience levels define; the
levels are accepted as ' given' !
Paul:
That isn't what I said or meant. The levels are "given" only to the
extent that they are described in Pirsig's books and this is a forum set
up to discuss those books.
"Phaedrus had once called metaphysics "the high country of the mind" -
an analogy to the "high country" of mountain climbing. It takes a lot of
effort to get there and more effort when you arrive, but unless you can
make the journey you are confined to one valley of thought all your
life. This high country passage through the Metaphysics of Quality
allowed entry to another valley of thought in which the facts of life
get a much richer interpretation. The valley spreads out into a huge
fertile plain of understanding." [Lila p.172]
I thought this forum is supposed to be about exploring that "fertile
plain of understanding" but it sometimes seems that a lot of people have
their own plot of land they are trying to sell :-)
Chris said:
So why the fanatical commitment to it, that is how suggestions and clues
become dogma's.
Paul:
I prefer to call it enthusiasm, and it is the moq.org forum you are on
after all. That said, it isn't supposed to be a fan club either, so
critics, cynics, mystics, idealists, materialists and even
neo-pragmatists (!) are all worthy contributors to the discussion, and
the validity/utility of the levels is rightly up for debate.
Regards
Paul
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 Mar 09 2004 - 15:05:40 GMT