Hi Peter,

>> Bo earlier:
>> > > One can't have a collection of two upper levels without it being a
>> > > collection of all levels and all levels means intellect as top notch
>> > > and thus an "intellectual" -- um -- culture. A SOM culture that (as
>> > > Steve says) doesn't know anything about social patterns (nor that
>> > > its own is intellectual I may add) Only from MOQ's meta-level the
>> > > Q-context is seen.
>>
>> > Dan:
>> > As you know, I don't subscribe to your theory that the MOQ is a
>> > "meta-level." The MOQ is Robert Pirsig's idea and as such is a
>> > collection of intellectual patterns of value
>
Peter:
>I think 'meta-level' is appropriate because openness to the dynamic is like
>seeing the whole context (the actual levels) by stepping beyond the limits
>of the 4th level, the limitations of SOM. Besides MoQ is metaphysics!

I agree with Dan. I think of the levels as types of patterns of value. I think 
that is what RMP meant when he used the terms. I can't think of what meaning a 
meta-level of the MOQ would have while thinking of the levels as types of 
patterns of value.

Regards,
S$teve

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