Mati: The general point is that we as humans today are composed or maintain all three or four value sets. Pirsig went to great length to show that Lila only really composed of three levels. "Biologically she is fine, socially she's pretty far down the scale, intellectually she's nowhere. But Dynamically . Ah! That is the one to watch." Pg 186. In Pirsig has once describe that DQ pervades all the levels. But if one of the levels is not present then what? Can Lila poses DQ Intellect, if so then where is the wake of SQ Intellect. Surely it would have been noticed by Pheadrus. I think Lila has managed to manipulate he social level reasonably well and that might count for the DQ that he is referring to. Perhaps Pheadrus was a bit harsh putting her "pretty far down the scale." But it was his observation not mine.
Ron: Mati, I believe Pirsig started that statement assessing Lila by Typical western standards, but when he employed MoQ she was assessed as having Dynamic Quality, biologically, socially and Intellectually included. She did not talk of social level topics but she did talk about her personal experiences and how she felt. By MoQ standards this is more intellectual than analytical skills. Lila is not manipulating symbols she is describing experience. The captain made the SOM mistake of assuming he knew her experience pre-conceptually and invalidated it writing it off as a lo quality or not even on the map. Totally missing out, as Dusenberry noted with the Natives peoples, on what really supplies the most information. Mati: What happens when Phedrus meets Reet the complete package. Krimel answer "can only be an intellectual formation" and you suggest only social values. Personal I think both of you missed the mark and that she has both. Joe went down and listed social or intellect. As I created the transcript I was trying to carefully embed both. From my estimation there were a few more social than Joe had. In addition there is a linguistic context issue of how and what she said as well. Using the analogy of a forest you do look at every leaf, or every word, implied or literal meaning. How about a branch, or every phrase, next the tree itself as a sentence. Or the forest as a whole or the entire transcript as the best mirror we have of Reet's conveyed thoughts on the question. Ron: I think we must tread carefully in this area when using MoQ terms as it applies to typical SOM standards of Social/intellectual definition. In this method abstract/concrete noun distinction sets the foundation for objective intellectual statements and subjective social statements. to misinterpret or "cross-interpret" subjective social statements as Dynamic Quality and creating a paradox in meaning creates a fallacious SOM scenario of MoQ championing subjectivism as dynamically superior to intellectual thought. One thing occurred to me is that perhaps the question may have been poorly conceived, but more importantly the answer that was given was pure and pristine and some might suggest a dynamic quality. However Pirsig has mentioned it before, once a word is spoken it is static. Ron: Once a word is understood, it is static. The most dynamic of these static intellectual patterns which describe experience are the ones that do not operate under the axioms of analytic assumptions. Deductive inference is more static than inductive reasoning. Mati: all four of us are reasonably well versed in Pirsig's work and yet we take something different from what we know about social and intellectual values and see Reet from a variety of values perspective. The larger point is there is no agreement as to how to clearly discern what should be intellect or social set of values to determine what values are there or not. If Reet's answer is pure and pristine and our perspectives are varied, then we need a better pair of glasses to see what Reet is telling us. The glasses I am referring to is concise understanding of what it means to be a value of intellect or intellectual value. If not then the social and intellectual values become whatever you see and erodes any potential clarity or greater understanding MOQ might provide as a whole. Ron: Mati, it all depends on which level you apply the MoQ DQ/SQ glasess. Reet may be looked at intellectually, socially, biologically and inorganically. To compare Reets social Quality with her intellectual quality is missing the point of what Pirsig is doing. Pirsig posits that intellectual patterns are more dynamic than social patterns. End. To compare them is redundant because you already know her intellectual patterns trump her social, no matter what. Conflict is marked in lo intellectual quality in those areas. In MoQ Individual experience is the highest static intellectual pattern this should be our guide in making the intellectual level distinction in MoQ. Mati: In Lila, Pirsig writes, The main part of his (Pheadrus) eccentricity seemed to be his refusal to accept "objectivity" as an anthropological criterion. He didn't think objectivity had any place in proper conduct of anthropological study. . "The trouble with the objective approach," Dusenberry said, "is that you don't learn much that way. The only way to find out about Indians is to care for them and win their love and respect. then they will do almost anything for you . But if you don't do that." he would shake his head and his thoughts would trail off." Pg 35 Reet by most standards was receptive to the question and shared her answer as a whole. What she shared was a potential blueprint of the values that make her up in response to that specific question. If I doing a more objective approach using the methodology as you suggested, my fear is that we don't get as accurate of a picture of who she is. She then is reduced to responding to a set of preordained criteria of values that may or may not represent who she really is, our quality of responses is potentially lowered, and that might be ok depending what you want to learn from Reet. But by doing that Reet fades in the objective reality, which to me is a personal disrespect to who she as a whole human. Again your method may be sound but intuitively it distances me with the subject I have come to learn from. Specifically I want to look at the patterns of Reet and the others participants in such a study is to see if there is a larger pattern that might understand how as a society we are moving socially and intellectually, I want to apply MOQ "Anthropologically". If MOQ is as good as we think it is, then it has to find a way to work in the world of research. Maybe there is a better way to do this but until we can figure out how, I believe MOQ will never be able to gain greater acceptance in the academic world. And who knows maybe that is ok. Ron: A very accurate assessment and excellent proposed use. Mati, it has been a pleasure having you on the discuss. I look foreword to your return. thank you for the discussion 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/ 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/
