Hi Steve
On 6 Dec.you said:
> Steve:
> To me it makes no sense to say that a distinction is a level. My
> understanding is that Pirsig's levels represent types of patterns of
> value.
Bo:
The levels are value, so a distinction can be of great value, but
will it make more sense (to you) if I call it "the value of the S/O
aggregate"? I have struggled to find the formulation that best
conveys the idea and have used the "aggregate" occasionally.
> Steve:
> I think I agree. It sounds like the symbols themselves (totems,
> words, ritual acts) may be social patterns since they are perpetuated
> through unconscious copying, but they aren't recognized as symbols
> outside of intellectual level awareness.
Bo:
OK, you seemed to see the idea better this way, that of symbols
coming into being with the 4th level, but "symbols themselves" is
a bit awkward because the 4th. level IS the S/O aggregate. The
idea is clearly expressed in ZAMM:
What is essential to understand at this point is that until
now there was no such thing as mind and matter, subject
and object, form and substance. Those divisions are just
dialectical inventions that came later. The modern mind
sometimes tends to balk at the thought of these
dichotomies being inventions and says,
> Steve:
> It sounds like you are saying that the intellectual level emerges
> with symbols being recognized as symbols.
Yes, exactly,
> I think that makes sense and is consistent with Pirsig's definition of
> intellect since skillful manipulation of symbols would seem to require
> an understanding of what symbols are.
No, the irony is that it doesn't. People of old manipulated (what
intellect later came to regard as) symbols, they spoke, sang,
worshipped images and statues in addition to carrying out skillful
calculations without regarding these as symbols. It was only with
SOM that the symbol different from what it symbolizes distinction
- or aggregate - came to be. I may sound adamant but this is so
important to understand..
Now, an Egyptian scribe making the hieroglyph "Pharaoh" on a
tomb wall knew well that it wasn't the king in flesh, yet it wasn't
"just" a symbol" it carried pharaoic power. There are many
modern social values, flags, medals, tombstones, national
anthems ...etc. and we call them rituals, symbols ...etc. but can't
neglect them which reveals the social value below .
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/
