Bo: As Pirsig says (in the PT letter) a line must be drawn somewhere for the social level lest it becomes useless (its biological roots show) as must be done for intellect, and he actually draws its line with the Greek thinkers (in MOQ this means SOM), but then he possibly saw the SOL implication and hastily added the cryptic "Oriental Intellect".
Ron: Bo, There is a reason. Logicians Main article: School of Names The logicians (School of Names) were concerned with logic, paradoxes, names and actuality (similar to Confucian rectification of names). The logician Hui Shi was a friendly rival to Zhuangzi, arguing against Taoism in a light-hearted and humorous manner. Another logician, Gongsun Long, told the famous When a White Horse is Not a Horse dialogue. This school did not thrive because the Chinese regarded sophistry and dialectic as impractical. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_philosophy Bo, I guess eastern intellect did not value SOM Wow, guess that knocks a hole in SOM as intellect Theory, in fact there are even many types of Dialectic other than SOM, but how can that be? When intellect is the value of a subject/object Divide? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic ahhh here we go the true intellectual level! http://wikinfo.org/index.php/Subject-object_problem Bo, I really see no reason for you to hold to the notion That SOM IS the intellectual level. SOL works just as well Accepting that SOM is one of many possible intellectual patterns. It Solves all your problems without creating any new ones. I really do not understand your reservation toward this, It resolves everything and allows SOL to function within The SOM pattern giving MoQ the explanatory power you Posit. -Ron 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/
