Hello everyone >From: "Ron Kulp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [MD] subject / object logic >Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:55:19 -0400 > > > >I've been emersing myself in Bodvar's work on the SOL concept and >I have to say I'm with him. I believe as well as Ham, that how reality >is percieved is through Subject object perception. To percieve and >understand >any part of reality is to percieve it as subject and object. Even our >sensual recognition is based in symbol comprehension.
Hi Ron If "sensual recognition is based on symbol comprehesion" then it should be no problem to tell me the taste of watermelon. Regardless, I too delved into Bo's SOL idea some years ago. However, after many discussions and much reading, I came to believe that Bo has gone off on a tangent that is incompatible with the MOQ as I understand it. SOL looks good from a SOM perspective, not from the MOQ perspective. >we are emersed in languge but also much deeper than imagined, language >is an out growth >of comprehension, language communicates this understanding. The MOQ goes along with the idea that we are immersed in culture. Culture dictates our understanding. >I believe >Subject >Object perception is base awareness for all living organisms,I believe >instinct is built on it. I asked my cat Goedel about this but he did not answer. Granted he's a bit reticent at times yet I have come to believe he is not now nor will he ever be an intellectual creature. Since Bo states SOM is intellect, I doubt Goedel is operating from a subject object perspective. > >I used Mathmatics as a model for this phenomena citing the concept and >employment of the "limit" >as a proof of sorts for this concept of subject object perception. > >"The argument that the MOQ is not an intellectual formulation but some >kind of other level is not clear to me. There is nothing in the MOQ that >I know of that leads to this conclusion." >-Quote from Pirsig > >I think Bo means that MOQ is an intellectual awareness of SO perception. Bo is a dear. But I have to agree with Robert Pirsig. > > The intellection of taking into account of how we understand >the universe. The paradox being we can't see the forrest through the >trees. Not just a greek >convention but a human condition, something the philosophies of the east >are well aquainted with. >It is the reason why the intellectual level can be interpreted to begin >with the organic level. The intellectual level can be interpreted in many ways. >Here is where we suffer a language problem with how to classify and what >to call this awareness >of s/o perception. Bo then brings up the question shouldn't there be >another category within the >intellectual level perhaps a subject object intellectual and a Quality >intellectual (for lack of >any proper descriptive term) a transcendent intellectual level one in >which the awareness of the >subject object perception is taken into account when intellectualizing. In my opinion, Bo's Q-intellect is not the MOQ as envisioned by Robert Pirsig. I think Mr. Pirsig has said as much. > >I suspect the problem with grasping this concept is the fact that there >is no suitable >conventional terminology for it so it kinda just enimatically floats >with terms like mysticism >and enlightenment for the lack of any deacent western terminology, so it >is not taken seriously. >how does one term an intellection which trancends common awareness of >perception without >sounding like a mystic? the problem is using a distinctive language >created from subject -object >experience to describe an infinite reality. this paradox happens because >anything outside this limited >perception is infinite and meaningless. There are many ways of perceiving reality. Subject object metaphysics is a high quality idea, nothing more. > >MOQ just may be a dynamic awareness freeing itself from a static >intellection of Subject object perception >and in that way Bo may be onto something. Only if one clings to the SOM way of perceiving reality. Once a person realizes there are no subjects and objects then there is only Dynamic awareness of static quality patterns of value. Thank you for your thoughts, Dan Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
