Marsha and Steve 28 Nov. Marsha cited Steve's:
> >Let's apply the pragmatic maxim here .... snip and said: > I still do not understand Bo's problem. As I've said when all are > seen as interrelated and interconnected static patterns of value, the > subject/object problem dissolves. (At least in theory, in practice > old habits are a bit difficult to break.) And I've always had a > problem with an upper DQ/sq level. DQ should not be confined in any > visual way. It certainly should not be confined to a level. Bo's > tenaciousness is remarkable, but has convinced me of nothing. We may have our personal takes of Pirsig's ideas, but if the level aspect of it is valid everything is NOT interrelated/interconnected - not at the pragmatic plane that Steve points to. You may be a Buddhist and feel all right with such "wisdom" but as Westerns steeped in SOM (what becomes the 4th. level in the MOQ) we demand an objective approach to things and are - likewise - bound to deem your approach as woolly nonsense. Then to the rest of Steve's > What are the consequences of seeing the MOQ as an intellectual pattern > that is superior to the intellectual pattern known as SOM ..... The consequence of seeing the MOQ as an intellectual pattern superior to another intellectual pattern called SOM is that the intellectual level isn't static - meaning not having any characteristic other than being a realm where "mental processing of symbols" takes place and the result of this processing - ideas - are stored. And this realm is indistinguishable from SOM's subjective realm called "mind". > as opposed to seeing all of intellect as SOM (IOW Pirsig's MOQ) ... After going through Steve's distortion machine .. phew! Intellect as SOM is fine, but "IOW Pirsig's MOQ" is nonsense. Intellect is a MOQ sub-set and can't contain the MOQ. > ... and the MOQ as a single pattern forming it's own new level (IOW Bo > and Platt's revised SOLAQI MOQ)? There was a time when I called the MOQ a 5th. level, but that's left long ago. Still that of intellect a sub-set of the Quality system and thus incapable of containing the system itself stands tall, Pirsig is the one that uses it, and after all the MOQ is a metaphysics and supposed to be above itself. Logic is not suspended. This about a system's relationship to itself is important. In lesser systems (if the problem ever comes up) for instance General Relativity SOM relegates it to Einstein's mind and to the mind of those who learn it. And I'm afraid this is what Pirsig in LILA's diluted intellectual level also does. The MOQ is an idea located at the intellectual level because this had become "mind" (not as Phaedrus envisaged it: as SOM) However the MOQ is supposed to replace SOM and has no more mind than it has substance. Anyway thanks Steve for understanding what's at stake 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/
