Inserted Bo ... On Nov 27, 2007 10:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Ian > > 26 Nov. you wrote: > > > (1) I may indeed have once referred to "GOF SOM as 4th Level", but I'm > > guessing that would only have been in a hypothetical sense in > > discussion with you .... ie if we see GOF SOM as the 4th / > > intellectual level, where can more enlightened intellect reside ? I'm > > pretty flexible about the answer ... either there are 5th (and > > possible 6th and 7th levels) for different kinds of intellect, OR GOF > > Intellect (SOM) can only be a part of the intellectual level. OR There > > are other enlightened forms of SOMism, other than GOF SOMism whereby, > > although the subject necessarily sees a world in terms of SO models, > > the subject is enlightened enough to recognise and discount the > > privelidged view of its ego from its own ontological view of the > > world. > > I need to come up for air after this deep-dive. The many > intellectual layers may spring from the impossible 4th. level that > LILA created: One that began as "song and dance" sometime in > paleolithic age and leaves the social level a tiny sliver between > biology and (this) intellect. If accepting the S/O intellect, all > puzzle pieces finds their place. The meta-level I speak about is > no static level - no level at al -, just the point from where the level > system is visible, particularly the 4th.
[IG] So you don't have a 5th level but you have a meta-level from which level 4 is "visible". A rose by any other name ? > > > (2) What does SOM "pervade" ... OK, as of now, I see only a combined > > level 3/4 ... a cultural level combining Pirsig's social and > > intellectual. Level 1 is physics, Level 2 is biology (genetic > > reproduction), Level 3/4 is self-consciousness (memetic reproduction) > > - it's the "self" that creates SOM in the first place - a subject to > > contrast with objects. Social interaction of memes (minds > > communicating) is what determines what is intellectual / rational (or > > not). Freedom of thought (with all un-questioned points seen as "moral > > holidays" in Jamesian terms) at the enlightened end, biological / > > physical defence against the questioning of traditional points at the > > "social" end in Pirsigian terms. Rather than social / intellectual I'd > > see the two ends of the cultural spectrum as authroitarian and > > enlightened. > > Even more suffocating feeling. I see no need for 3-4 level, the > original lay-out is perfect. Particularly self-consciousness reveals > that you see the MOQ from SOM's premises. [IG] As I said, I'm describing the world from my (conventional) perspective as a subject, but not losing sight of that fact, discounting it. It means I can write sentences starting with "I", just like you do, just like we all do. > "Memes" and > Dawkins have to be jettisoned along with Darwin to get the > Quality idea which is better understood in the negative sense, > how the upper is a relief from the lower level's strictures. [IG] Jettison Darwin ? ... sorry are we denying Darwinian evolution in the MoQ now ? Forget the word "meme" if it offends ... just my shorthand for any idea that catches on, is spread through culture, and turns up in various mutated incarnations throught the history of cultures. Forget Dawkins ... they were called "mimemes" before Dawkins tagged the concept memes ... and the concept is as old as culture itself. Anyway ... "understood in the negative sense" ... OK, I have referred to the "hygiene" concept here already ... let's see where you take us. > Consciousness in the self sense is not part of the 3rd. level, this > only appears at the upper strata of the 4th. after the S/O screw > had turned for millennias. Self-consciousness has not created > SOM, it's the other way round.. [IG] How can you say that ? Upper strata of the 4th ? not simply the 4th ... you consider SOM possible to exist without S ? What is self-consciousness but "S" contrasted to "O" ? > > > (3) You said "The static levels are blind to the level context (not to > > quality though) the Q context is only seen from MOQ's meta-level ... > > If this is made into MOQ's 4th. level, it all turns haywire something > > that has truly happened" ?? > > > You'll have to explain that to me in more examples .... it might > > change my view if I understood that ? > > Examples? Above I accuse you of looking at the MOQ from SOM > which means applying the S/O template on to any level below > intellect. Self-awareness at the social level means cave-man > being aware of being a "caveman". [IG] I don't see that ? I doubt a caveman would recognise "cavemen" as distinct from any other men. And I'd see self-consciousness in any "man" being the recognition of "me" in relative to the world. I see SOMism as the cementing of the S-O view as something fundamental / metaphysical, whereas it is just a convenient (pragmatic) matter of perspective, that must have dawned on man (and other "higher" animals) > In retrospect the Homeric > heroes are social age examples and what characterizes existence > at this level is just the lack of the subject/object (or more > sophisticated varieties of a self aware of self aware of ...etc.) > Achilles and Hector never stops to reflect on their actions or role, > they are totally immersed in emotions. [IG] Again, how can you say that ? They may not have reflected (intellectualised) their "selves", but surely their actions suggest they recognised themselves and their participation / consequences in the world ? > Exactly what Pirsig meant > (had he been honest) by the old Bible books lacking intellectual > value i.e.SOM! The prophets fears (God) and hates (his enemies) > no self in the skeptic sense . But of course (if this is the issue) > they had names and knew their ancestors and their social > position. The latter was ALL, we see this attitude in the > contemporary Jihadists who identify with the common cause and > sacrifice themselves driven by intense hatred of Allah's enemies > which is the Western Values which is intellect-as-SOM which is > the intellect/society struggles new arena. > > Enough [IG]Why "ALL" ? If you'd said "GOF-Western-Intellect-as-SOM" in that last sentence I'd agree with you, but your argument lost me already. I see the recognistion of the existence of self (self-consciousness) as something that precedes intellectualisation as SOMism ... Ian G. > > > 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/
