Hi Steve, Bodvar, Ian, Horse, Platt and all Steve had said: Let's be clear, the MOQ does not make SOM the intellectual level. Only the unnecessary and wrong-headed SOLAQI interpretation does this. The intellectual level of Pirsig's MOQ is the collection of all intellectual patterns of value.
In Lila Pirsig wrote: "What had happened since the end of World War I was that the intellectual level had entered the picture and had taken over everything. It was this intellectual level that was screwing everything up." Ian says: Pirsig does not say "the intellectal level" He says "this intellectual level" Referring to the state of the predominant pattern (SOM) in the intellectual level post WW2 (absolutely explicitly). We are always "In Our Time". Do we have to go over this historical axis again Bo, I thought we'd agreed there. Platt: I would go so far as to say that unless the intellectual level is acknowledged to be the same as SOM, Pirsig's entire analysis of our societal problems and his proposed MOQ solution goes down the toilet. Bodvar: Wow, Platt's matter-of-fact style does much better than my shouthing from mountains. I respect Steve's and Horse's defending the Faith, but Pirsig is about as vague as Jesus and as this quote shows he does regard the intellectual level as SOM ... except when asked directly when it again turns into "intellectual patterns" and the circle is closed. Andre: Please gentlemen, refer to page numbers when you quote (!). I don't want to get into the cross-fires of (perhaps) longstanding arguments and I do not want to play the eff'n social worker. This whole thing has been going on for a long time and I am certainly still grappling with it (also to do with Marsha's entry in this post). Please do not get personal. I think it is fair to suggest that if Pirsig argues that '...since the end of World War 1 was that *the* intellectual level had entered the picture and taken over everything.' And then says : It was *this* intellectual level that was screwing everything up' we must safely conclude that he meant the self same intellectual (SOM) level. If he had've meant anything other than 'level' he surely would have used the concept 'pattern'. Of course this is the big thing and struggle in ZMM i.e. how to expand 'reason' ( this SOM intellectual level) to reach and 'represent'/ reflect', Quality, without gimmics, without 'style' syruped all over it (ZMM). And to follow Bodvar's line of 'reasoning': the procedure Pirsig follows ( i.e.to create this 'bridge' ...this 'expansion' of SOM into MoQ) is contradictory and flawed. Perhaps it simply comes down to agreeing on whether Pirsig has been able (i.e. to everyone's conviction and satisfaction),to (1) penetrate and adequately ' expand/subsume/TAME (!) this level i.e a combination of SOM/MoQ)? has he (2) created a competing 'mode' of reasoning (the MoQ) at the same level?, or (3) has he created (of necessity,or by contradiction or faillure to convince) another level? Pfheew. Is this an adequate, fair summary of the stated difficulty? Or am I missing a link? Arrrggg, fucking social workers! For what it is worth, Andre PS Bodvar, I think what Jesus said wasn't really vague...he was very direct, it's just that along the historical line some copyists and interpreters of his words had to water it down because it threatened some people's power, politics, influence and status. i.e their static social patterns. 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/
