Hi Joe 10 Sep. you wrote: > Hi Bo an all, > There are three posts I have recently read that confuse me. One by > Ron composed of just symbols. A lot by Arlo: ³No more and no less a > role that any of the multiplicityS.. One by Marsha to Arlo: ³I no > longer think we have a shared understanding of "honesty" or trust. I > just don'tS..²
Ron has cast himself in the role of our village idiot, a necessary one. Arlo's grasp of the MOQ has always been feeble and now his grasp of his self seems to slip too. When Marsha find this discussion deviating from its purpose we know how far things have come > Bo, you see a present danger in a misunderstood static MOQ. I can see > that the possibility of a social ³avatar² used for experience denies > the trust placed in a conscious, immediate undefined evolution of > undefined dq to the social level. Social dq is denied. The static levels don't know anything about being Q levels. We are all levels, but only from the meta-position of the MOQ do we see the complete picture. However, we can't stay there, our "home" is the static range. What it means to be at the inorganic level I don't know, dead I guess, but at the biological level senses dominate, the social level is the realm of emotions and at intellect reason is the focus. What I mean by my "warning" is what Pirsig speaks about, namely the intellectual level (whose purpose it is to control the social level) joining forces with biology who in turn is controlled by society and gladly see its controller weakened. Thus intellect overdoes things, it saws over the branch it's supposed to sit on. This was what he saw threatened the USA in the sixties and seventies. An aside. THIS is the correct view of intellect (not anything about "manipulating symbols", but the "objective" level that looks for REASONS for everything also for criminal acts, no-one is responsible, they are leaves in an objective storm. Anyway, the majority of this site insist that the MOQ is an intellectual pattern (I disagree, intellect is a MOQ pattern) and that its (MOQ's) purpose is to subdue intellect's S/O (objectivity or reason) from within. But an intellectual level thus "reformed" is no intellect any more and will loose all controlling power versus society and its values will rebound. It's back to the stone age with "avatars" and centaurs and cyclops ..etc lurking. > The intellectual level is an orphan and useless. I would say it stronger, it kills intellect. I guess a destroyed level is a possibility, locally at least. A lot of Hollywood films are about survivors from a catastrophe acting like animals (only with language) their society has disintegrated. In that process intellect has disappeared as well, but Hollywood knows no "intellect" ;-) > Only the organic level evolves from the inorganic level, and > mathematics is the only language of truth. I guess the organic level > developed mathematics. You mean intelligence? Mathematics as an academical discipline is intellect. > What is consciousness? This whole process > seems to be an incomplete metaphysics. I agree without the combination > of the defined and the undefined present in SOL evolution is denied. > Slavery is the only solution to help me find a way out. The SOL simply says that Intellect is the S/O distinction which is objectivity or reason. This is the highest level and the MOQ is not to interfere with it, thereby destroying intellect's power over society. > IMO Evolution to an intellectual level cannot proceed from an > unconscious ³avatar². With no comprehensible social or intellectual > level Ham is correct, evolution is not possible. The boundaries of a > social and intellectual level are destroyed, and evolution is denied > to an avatar? I am slave to nothing, a nihilist! This may give rise to another essay so for now. Thanks for reading Bo > Joe > > > > On 9/9/08 12:08 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Joe. > > > > 5 Sep. you wrote: > > > >> Previously when I considered what I know, I used to follow > >> Aristotle¹s theory of abstraction for knowledge. .... > > > > You are a welcome relief from the chatterbugs who have found a new > > way to avoid the MOQ (virtual reality, avatars etc.) instead of > > applying the MOQ to these things. The gods in human and/or animal > > guises (avatars) belonged to the mythological pre-intellect past > > when gods and mortals weren't separated. i.e: a virtual/flexible > > reality. This was replaced by an era where there's only one TRUE (to > > become "objective") reality and the past became a result of human > > imagination (to become "subjective"). > > > > You are right about Aristotle, he was one of the first SOMist when > > the new intellectual level had started to wield its influence and > > knowledge had become approximations to the said truth. The closer to > > truth the better the theory, but never IT, theories irredeemable > > belong to the abstract realm. > > > >> After reading Pirsig I accepted a direct experience of knowledge. > >> I agree the MoQ IS a virtual reality game. The MOQ is a set of > >> glasses. In an MoQ format I can¹t take them off. As a Hero, I > >> don¹t need no stinkin¹ glasses! > > > > Yes, the MOQ glasses reveals a DQ/SQ reality which is made up of > > four static levels. DQ's urge to escape the pending static stage, > > but creating a new one in the process, we know. We also know that it > > is immoral for a lower level to "devour" the higher, so it's deeply > > wrong to use the MOQ for promoting the old social avatarish view of > > reality. And it's not just Arlo. DMB is just as much a sinner here > > by his insisting that the MOQ is just another virtual "acting" > > reality. > > > > Bo > > > > PS > > This is my age old worry that a misunderstood MOQ is a "dangerous > > idea". It's the intellect-bio coalition to quell society moved one > > stage upwards when the said misunderstood "moq" joins forces with > > society to undermine intellect. Pirsig may have released an unruly > > Genie if not the SOL interpretation is approved quickly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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/ > > 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/
