Hi Ham 20 Nov. you wrote:
[Ham previously]: > > > If we lived in a moral universe, there would be no need for value > > > preferences or morality systems, and life would be meaningless. [Bodvar]: > > Ham is correct here too, but this requires a little clearing up. To > > say that reality IS something is meaningless, even more so is the > > assertion that it can be split and remain, and it's here things goes > > wrong. Pirsig says that SOM splits reality S/O while it postulates > > one subjective and one objective reality. Likewise the MOQ > > postulates one Dynamic reality and one Static reality the Quality > > lies in this classification and makes them DQ/SQ. [snip] Despite > > Ham's peculiar phrasing he is right. Humans is a biological speciedisappears > > that - first - rose to the social level and then (necessarily > > because they were the sole social level "inhabitants") rose to the > > intellectual level. But NB! it wasn't biological "man" who rose to > > intellect but "social man". [Ham now] > Bo, you wield a lot of influence here, despite your controversy with > Pirsig's thesis. As a fellow renegade with an "alternate view", I'm > allied with your cause. Indeed, I'd like to cement that alliance. Alliances emerges and disappears in this forum faster than in pre- WW1 Europe ;-) To Pirsig the Quality=Reality was the overwhelming "fact" and the MOQ secondary, I claim that nothing is manifest before the dynamic/static split, that's my only controversy. > But the problem I have with your anthropological man "rising to the > intellectual level", thereby recognizing SOM which prevents him from > understanding "Dynamic Reality", doesn't make sense to me. Why do you > insist that Intellect is some "brass ring" to be grabbed by an > evolving species, rather than an inherent capability of the human > being? THis is the old "bone". You consider Man (we allow a bit political incorrectness) as existence's rock bottom (why I compare you with Phaedrus) I understand you perfectly. To say that there's anything outside Man is futile, but therefore it must be suspended ......OR a Man metaphysics (MOM) constructed in the same manner as the MOQ with the same Absolute/Differentiated divide and differentiated levels. > Was it not intellect (on man's part) that enabled him to > theorize a value-centered reality? I find it incredible that anyone > can consider intellect an impediment to metaphysical understanding. Right, this point is watertight from the premises of Man gazing out on a World that he theorize about. This is SOM and its "intellect" is the theorizing. But MOQ's intellectual LEVEL is the VALUE of this Man/World distinction. Because it isn't indigenous to existence, there was a time before it (social) that didn't know it, and a biological level before it that even less ...etc. (these levels constitute our existence, but I speak about the time when they were leading edge) > Call me a contrarion, but it seems to me that it's this 'levels > hierarchy' foisted on us by Pirsig, not intellectuality or SOM, that > has stultified our intuitive thought. Once the above is grasped, namely that the Man/World dichotomy is a static stage that we are hypnotized by into believing is how reality really IS, after that cales fall ..etc. I have read the rest, but this is the crux and without settling it we just talk past each other. 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/
