Greetings of the season to Bo and Gav -- On December 16, Gav wrote (with some deletions): > I think that the subject-object split underlies the > intellectual level. ... > > The intellectual level is that level where the > individual is born - the individual is a subject, the > subject split from the world of objects. The problem > with SOM is that this split was presumed to be the > whole nature of reality, rather than a tool with which > to analogize it. > > The split is crucial. ... > The intellect as a powerful tool facilitates this > spiritual growth. It leads first into separation - the > split - as the child becomes individuated. from > here the ego begins to assume control. > > After the child has become a fully individuated adult > the intellect begins to lead him back to unity, to a > resolution of the split. To a diminution of the ego. > The MOQ is a great example of the intellect doing > this. > > Intellect points the way - takes us to the point of > departure....and the beginning of wholeness, unity > once more, but this time *conscious* of our own > godhood, our identity with the cosmos. > > So Bo is right, the subject/object split is > inseparable from the intellectual level. It gave rise > to it. Even when we are thinking in MOQ terms we > are still subjects thinking in terms of objects. The > crucial difference is that *we are now aware of this*.
On December 17, Bo responded: > That's it! But why not say that is IS the intellectual level? > Is there a difference? Indeed, why not call it the intellect itself? Considered without the levels, it seems to me that this alleged "breakthrough" which Bo has proposed would clear away the mythos of a collective intellect and make the MoQ compatible with the classical ontology understood by most philosophers--specifically: 1) That the individual is born as a subject split from the whole of reality. 2) That the intellect is the tool by which the subject objectivizes differentiated reality. 3) That differentiation is inseparable from (is the same as) intellection. 4) That, as we become aware of objects, we become conscious of our identity with the unity of reality. What is still missing in this ontology, however, is an epistemology to explain #4; that is, how does differentiated (S/O) awareness translate into consciousness of undifferentiated reality? If Pirsig's Quality thesis is to play a role in this cosmology, here would seem to be the ideal place for it. Not to plug my own philosophy, but inasmuch as Pirsig often equated Quality with Value, I feel obliged to remind you gentlemen that there is a valuistic explanation to bridge this gap. If this cosmic split that divides the subject from the whole of reality leaves in its wake an "attractive power" that draws the subject to its "otherness", such an attraction could be called Value. Imagine Reality as a huge electromagnet, and the individuated subject as a metal particle that has been released from this magnet. The mother magnet and its estranged particle then become polarized contingencies of a unified system. Caught in the "valuistic field" of its uncreated Source, the subject turns its attention outward and tries to perceive what it is drawn to. But because its perception is limited by organic sensibility, the subject is only cognizant of specific properties or attributes of its object. It is these attributes which define S/O "reality" and which are intellectualized as the things and events of a relational world. In the process of constructing this space/time reality, the individuated subject incrementally extracts Value from the Source, reducing the "differential charge" between them, and ultimately reclaiming its entire value complement. At this point (in finite time) the particle and the mother magnet are no longer divided but constitute a single identity. Admittedly this is a simplified metaphysical scenario, but I offer it as a way to resolve the dynamics of Bo's ontology, at least as it has been outlined by Gav with his approval. Conceivably, it might also suggest a new way to think of Quality (Value) in the Pirsigian context. Comments anyone? Enjoy the holiday, Ham 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/
