Diana McPartlin (email@example.com)
Fri, 17 Apr 1998 19:13:08 +0100
Martin Striz wrote:
> The world is both Dynamic and Static. This is where we ought to start
> approaching undivided reality from.
> I think we have answered the first question sufficiently. I have not
> taken the MOQ position just so I could keep arguing over objectivity and
> subjectivity. I, like Pirsig, simply left it behind.
Well of course open LILA at a random page to see how often he "leaves
behind" the subject-object metaphysics! LILA proposes a new paradigm of
reality and argues that it is better than the existing one. As the
existing one is implicit rather than explicit it must first be made
explicit so that it can be rejected. If you don't do that people will
simply try to impose the Metaphysics of Quality on top of the
subject-object metaphysics without realizing it.
>From the discussion so far I like Donny's definition best
" I am whatever I don't encounter, for I am what's doing the
There are various opinions as to how far the subject-self extends
(Pirsig isn't entirely clear about this). Whether it is all thought or
merely the entitiy that thinks the thoughts, but that's not what
matters. The point is that the boundary exists somewhere. As long as
there is a "me" and an everything else, the philosophy is based on the
-- post message - mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org unsubscribe/queries - mailto:email@example.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:06 CEST