Hi Bo, Steve: >> Can you point to where Pirsig says something like this?: >> "paraphrasing Pirsig: "Intellect is the power of distinguishing >> between symbols and what is symbolized."
Bo: > Er ... no, I used "paraphrase" in a too wide sense. He never said > that. I just wish he would have drawn the conclusion of his own > reasoning which would have forced on (in the this case) the > distinction between symbols and what is symbolized, i.e. the > S/O. But I'm just dreaming, Pirsig can't do it after having invested > so much in his system of how MOQ "encases" SOM, the known > inorg+bio=objects ...etc. and the ensuing explanations of how > THIS does away with SOM's paradoxes (platypis). I say that the > SOL interpretation just pertains to the 4th. level, it does, but this > has wider ramifications among other that of doing away with > these cumbersome things. > Steve: I don't think the MOQ wants to do away with a distinction between symbols and what they symbolize. I think symbols are social or intellectual patterns that may represent social, biological, inorganic, and intellectual patterns (though I don't think Pirsig explicitly locates symbols in the hierarchy). Manipulations of such symbols are concepts and rationales which are intellectual patterns. The collection of all such patterns is the intellectual level itself. Which type of pattern of value do you see symbols as? Regards, Steve 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/
