Magnus.
On 27 April:
I had said:
> > You may not agree with me that MOQ=SOM, nor that MOQ is out of SOM,
> > but my conclusion is that (by this logic) MOQ is out of intellect.
> > All levels spawned one ambiguous pattern that became the "carbon"
> > for the next level. The patterns you mention all undermined SOM and
> > at first I tended to regard modern physics as intellect's "carbon".
> > I have however not closed that case.
Magnus:
> The "carbon" of intellect is of course language. How can anyone doubt
> that?
Language is the social pattern that DQ used for the intellectual
development, but as said I regard intellect and the MOQ to have
a level-like relationship so it was intellect's "carbon" I spoke
about. OK, I'm still thinking and will return to it.
> > There were no gravity only the data of things falling to the ground.
> "Only the *data* of things..."??? But what about the THINGS Bo? Didn't
> the THINGS fall to the ground? I'm talking about the things. Come on!
> Reality is about more than just talking about it, discussing it, and
> thinking about it. It's out there as well!
Sure, that's what I said, but Pirsig's point is that ancient times did
not regard their view as an intellectual explanation of an objective
reality, but that all world was animated and that "things" wanted
to come to rest on the ground. Consequently the "explanation/
reality" reality came to be with SOM (in ZMM ) with the 4th. level
in LILA.
The same argument was used in other contexts too
He used the number zero as a starter. Zero, originally a
Hindu number, was introduced to the West by the Arabs
during the Middle Ages and was unknown to the ancient
Greeks and Romans. How was that? he wondered. Had
nature so subtly hidden zero that all the Greeks and all
the Romans...millions of them...couldn't find it?
And again in a more familiar S/O way later in the same chapter
What is essential to understand at this point is that until
now there was no such thing as mind and matter, subject
and object, form and substance. Those divisions are just
dialectical inventions that came later. The modern mind
sometimes tends to balk at the thought of these
dichotomies being inventions and says, ``Well, the
divisions were there for the Greeks to discover,'' and you
have to say, ``Where were they? Point to them!''
In ZMM there were no levels, but in a MOQ retrospect it's plain
that he speaks about the social level when ancient times are
treated and also that his bashing of SOM becomes a bashing of
intellect that created the notion of - for example - a zero waiting
to be discovered and a gravity that waited for Newton to
formulate it.
Now, had LILA kept intellect=S/O (as in ZAMM) it would have
been fine, but Pirsig found that the 4th. level wasn't a MOQ sub-
set rather that the MOQ was a 4th. level pattern, thus "intellect"
was kept the idea realm it is in SOM. It had just been hijacked by
the villainous "science" ....etc, and the MOQ became paralyzed
> If you disregard the *things*, then I understand your constant
> preachings about
I don't disregard things when my focus is on the 4th level, but
when it's at the MOQ the fundamental split isn't between things
(matter) and our subjective theories (about them).
> I have no difficulty understanding the example, it's you who have
> difficulty understanding the (or rather, you pretend there is no)
> difference between: Newton's explanation was so good that it soon
> transformed physics. and Newton's explanation was so good that it soon
> transformed our model of physics.
Again this is intellect's S/O, the highest and best static value, but
not existence's fundamental split.
Bo
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/
