Hi All If the intellectual level at last came to fully master the social level what difference would that make to individuals and the society we live in?
David M ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 11:08 AM Subject: Re: [MD] The intellectual level - once more > Ian, All > > 23 Nov. you said: > >> Bo it seems to me he's evading giving you the answer you want to hear, >> but is patently clear that he does NOT intend the 4th / intellectual >> level to be seen simply as SOM, not even historically. > > THAT much I have figured out ;-). > >> In fact he's confirming what several have been asserting on here ... >> that SOM pervades the social level too. > > Ditto! > >> The fact he avoids giving (in that letter) any clearer indication of >> what intellect actually is, suggests as DMB did recently that we >> "know" the social / intellectual differences (pragmatically) but >> really do not have any definitive distinction. (This is entirely >> consistent with my own preferred view ... but that's another story.) > > No level is defined, the first and second are self-evident. The 3rd. > may also look self-evident, but it has a MOQ particular MOQ > flavour and this flavour increases when it comes to the 4th. As > Pirsig says in the said letter: > > "... but not intellectual in the MOQ sense".. > > In "Lila's Child" (p.64) he says: " > > In LILA I never defined the intellectual level since > everyone who is up to reading LILA already knows what > intellectual means." > > But in the letter he refers to the early books of the Bible as > lacking intellectual value, thus reading books is no intellectual > criterion ..IN A MOQ SENSE!!! .. and this is plainly the S/O > SENSE!! Why did he not return Q-intellect its original and true > definition instead of ensnaring himself in the logical flaws of the > said letter? > > I'm not exactly asking you Ian, just venting my frustration. You > once referred to "GOF SOM" as the 4th. level. At first I thought > you thereby saw the 4th. level as the S/O distinction, but it was a > false hope. You still see SOM as just pervading intellect. WHAT > exactly does it pervade, without (in a P. fashion) answer > "intellect"? > > One more: The static levels are blind to the level context (not to > quality though) the Q context is only seen from MOQ's meta- > level. The 4th. level by itself is SOM and its "intellect" is the > subject - the mind - that peers out at the objective world. If this is > made into MOQ's 4th. level, it all turns haywire something that > has truly happened. > > Bo > > > > 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/ > 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/
