Hello Andrè 16 Oct. you wrote:
> I'd like to put these next questions in the Discuss. (If these have > been sufficiently answered elsewhere could you please direct me). They are addressed in Pirsig's books ;-). > (1) What is the essential difference between the MoQ and SOM thinking? > The reason I ask is that lots of talk has been going on about MoQ > 'interpretations' and lots of times people have been 'admonished' for > their (falling back into) SOM thinking/reasoning (and SOM is receiving > a fair bashing here). We have all been brought up, and most of our > lives, immersed in SOM. I am still grappling with this. It is > difficult to take the cultural glasses off and this leads to my second > question, A most apt set of questions Andrè, and to start with the last (if it is possible to take one's cultural glasses off). Yes, but it's dangerous for the first one who does so. Phaedrus of ZAMM did and was struck down by intellect's immune system (because the MOQ is "out of intellect" or out of SOM). But as said most of this discussion hasn't moved one iota out of intellect (or SOM) and Pirsig himself recanted and dropped Phaedrus' radical MOQ (intellect=SOM) and when LILA arrived the intellectual level had become the nondescript article we know. Returning to you original question: "What is the essential difference between the MoQ and SOM thinking?" It's the new DQ/SQ metaphysics (split) that relegates the previous metaphysics (S/O) a place within the SQ realm. The first Q insight were the "Pre-intellect/Intellect" one where "intellect" was the subject aware of objects. And had the final MOQ retained this intellect, but ...alas. > (2) how can we recognise in our own and other's arguments/ positions > the SOM thinking elements? Is there an "easy" way/ trick to this? How > can we help ourselves and others move towards MoQ 'reasoning'? This sounds a bit megalomania, but the sure sign is that of NOT understanding the SOL, meaning that their SOM's "glasses" are so firmly set that no peek outside them is possible. Sincerely Bodvar PS > I realise that this Discuss is one place but ehhh a small instruction > manual? a sort of a MoQ for dummies like me? Phew, If it only was that simple. You know the weak (Einstein) and strong (Bohr) interpretations of Quantum Physics? The weak one has been disproved through several experiments (the first Alain Aspect's in 1985) There is a similar approach to the MOQ - the SOL the strong - but what experiment can prove or disprove it is yet to be figured out. 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/
