At 10:57 AM 12/22/2007, you wrote:

>Marsha said:
>My original question (borrowed from Tittivulus) in this thread 
>was:  So why not explore the notion of a distinct 's/o experience' 
>as a working hypothesis so you can proceed to explore the various 
>components of such an experience (components, not parts).  Wouldn't 
>that be a better, more MOQ'ish method of inquiry?
>
>dmb says:
>I don't understand. What is a "distinct s/o experience"? What sort 
>of "components" are we talking about here and how are they different 
>from "parts"? I suspect that Tittivulus is only mocking us.

Greetings David,

I envisioned a "distinct s/o experience" as being an experience 
confined only to subjects and objects (dualism).  Distinct from all 
other kinds of experiences we might suggest, with an emphasis on 
'experience' rather than a thing.  My understanding is that parts are 
separate things, while components are interrelated 
systems.  Tittivulus MAY be mocking us.  It won't be the first time 
I've been mocked, and it won't be the last time.  If I can learn 
something, I'm happy.  Or he could be pointing to the ridiculousness 
of asking such question, and pointing to the whole picture, the 
Tao.  But it did dawn on me that to ask questions from a 'experience' 
point-of-view may have something to offer.  I'm checking it 
out.  Actually, it did happen to me recently when I was confronted 
with a problem.  I couldn't make any sense out of it.  I finally 
broke it down into biological, social & intellectual patterns, it 
made made better sense.



>Marsha said:
>At this point, it seems that the answer is yes.  Because in doing so 
>it becomes clear that there are two components to the s/o 
>experience: an Intellectual Level component and a Social Level 
>component.  It is a more MOQ'ish hypothesis because the discussion 
>is then centered on experience (value) rather than things, and 
>offers a broader point-of-view.
>
>dmb says:
>Well, radical empiricism rejects standard empiricism because it 
>isn't empirical enough. So I'd certainly agree that a serious 
>emphasis on experience is very MOQish but I don't understand what 
>sort of experience or components we're talking about here.

Value is experience.  Right?  So I'm thinking that the 's/o 
experience' has two basic experiencial components: social & 
intellectual.  Exploring them separately and then their relationship 
seems to make sense.


>Marsha said:
>The purpose of the Intellectual Level is to sustain and improve the 
>Social Level.  It seems to me that in the past the SOM was an 
>Intellectual pattern that sustained and improved the Social 
>Level.   Now the Intellectual Level is promoting an even better 
>improvement by way of the MOQ's value-based perspective.  Understood 
>this way, there seems to be no need for a MOQ level.  The MOQ, which 
>is an intellectual pattern, is just performing its purpose of 
>improving the Social Level.
>
>dmb says:
>Right, but I think Pirsig's diagnosis of history, if you will, says 
>that in modern times the intellectual level has aligned itself with 
>the biological. Its attack on the social level was in part a 
>political necessity but intellect developed in a certain direction 
>as a result. Its not just that scientific materialism tends to 
>dismiss values and morals as "merely subjective" beliefs and such, 
>but also that science, knowledge and technology all become focused 
>almost exclusively on the basic biological needs. More food, more 
>safety, more comfort, more, more, more stuff. Even growth in 
>measured quantitatively rather than qualitatively. We're talking 
>about the objectification and exploitation of the whole planet and 
>all the creatures on it. I think the MOQ is saying that intellect 
>has evolved from its historic roots and has to serve life in terms 
>of something higher than creature comforts. And its relationship to 
>the social level needs adjustment along these lines.

Yes, RMP did state that in modern times there is a struggle going 
between the intellectual level and the social level.  But he also 
stated that the _purpose_ of the Intellectual Level is to sustain and 
improve the Social Level.  I agree with you, the situation is a 
mess.  Isn't it that the MOQ will hopefully realign the Intellectual 
Level with it's primary purpose.

Marsha





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/

Reply via email to