Hi Marsha,
> Doesn't the s/o experience having overlapping social patterns > (component experiences) and intellectual patterns (component > experience) help? Steve: I'm not sure what we're disagreeing about. T9o clarify, I am saying that SOM is an intellectual pattern and my concern was whether you are seeing SOM as a social pattern as well as an intellectual pattern which would suggest to me what I think would be a misunderstanding of what social patterns are. I see what you are saying about the types of patterns of value as components of experience, but I would say that the component that includes dividing experience into subjects and objects is intellectual. Marsha: > At the Social Level we don't think this is > subject, this is object. It's the social aspect of Mind, but we > don't think it in a manipulating (Intellectual) way, we just take it > for granted. > Steve: "The social aspect of mind" seems to refer to Pirsig saying that inorganic and biological patterns are objective while social and intellectual patterns are subjective. Social patterns therefore are indeed subjective but it is only intellectual patterns that Pirsig associates with mind. LC annotation #25: "For purposes of MOQ precision let’s say that the intellectual level is the same as mind. It is the collection and manipulation of symbols, created in the brain, that stand for patterns of experience." So I don't see a social aspect to mind though intellectual patterns are culturally constructed. Pirsig defines culture as social and intellectual patterns. RMP from Lila "The culture in which we live hands us a set of intellectual glasses to interpret experience with, and the concept of the primacy of subjects and objects is built right into these glasses." So intellectual patterns are indeed learned within a culture but that doesn't make them social patterns. These are still intellectual glasses not social glasses. We don't think to ourselves "I am going to apply the transitive property of logical thinking that says that if A implies B and B implies C, then A implies C" we just go ahead and draw our conclusion without being conscious of the intellectual pattern that led us to the conclusion. That pattern of thinking is still an intellectual pattern since it is a pattern of thought even though it is so ingrained that we aren't conscious of using it. There is no such thing as "social thought" or "social mind." 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/
