Greetings Platt,
Thanks Platt, I never thought I'd be a Bo
convert, but there is a need to get beyond even
the Intellectual patterns. Here are the two notes you referenced:
56. The word produced implies that Dynamic Quality is a
part of a cause and effect system of the kind generated by
scientific thinking. But Dynamic Quality cannot be part of
any cause and effect system since all cause and effect
systems are static patterns. All we can say is that these
static patterns emerged and that they are better than
physical nothingness.
A philosophic tradition of scientific value-neutrality would
argue that you cannot say these value patterns are better than
physical nothingness because scientifically speaking in the
real world nothing is better than anything else. But if these
patterns had not emerged there would be no life. And if life is
not better than death and the science that life produces is not
better than non-science, then this scientific tradition of value
neutrality is no better than no words at all. That is, it has no
merit.
59. I think this paradox exists as a result of the materialist
history of scientific thinking. Scientists often forget that all
scientific knowledge is subjective knowledge based on
experience, although science does not deny that this is true.
All objects are in fact mental constructs based on
experience. If we do not forget this and start with
experience as the beginning point of the experiment, rather
than objective quantum particles as the beginning point of
the experiment, the paradox seems to vanish.
The existence of collective masses of electrons can be inferred
from experience and there is every reason to think they exist
independently of the mind. But in the case of the spin of an
individual electron, there is no experience. In addition, the
nature of the Heisenberg Theory of Indeterminacy prevents
any inference from general collective experience of electrons
to certify the spin of any individual electron. If you cant
experience something and you cant infer it either, then you
have no scientific basis for saying that it exists. Thus the
single quantum event that is supposed to trigger the cats fate
is a figment of the imagination. It can never exist
independently of the mind and cannot have any effect
whatsoever on any real cat that does exist independently of the
mind. The Schrödinger experiment is interesting to think
about, but like an angels-on-pinheads experiment, is
impossible in to perform in an objective world.
Marsha
At 09:38 AM 5/21/2009, you wrote:
Marsha,
Well said! A clear, concise summary of Bo's position as ever posted.
Just to add a bit to it I ran across in
reviewing Pirsig's notes to the LS his
description of S/O as "scientific thinking." (Notes 56 & 59) I thought that
hit the nail on the proverbial head. What we need is less scientific
thinking and more aesthetic thinking -- a cause you have championed
from the get go.
Platt
On 21 May 2009 at 8:50, MarshaV wrote:
>
> Ron,
>
> I'm talking, like Bo, of the explanatory strength
> of the MOQ. It seems to me that if it is clearly
> stated that the Intellectual Level is of
> subject/object patterns it becomes very clear
> that dwelling in the Intellectual Level (no how
> exalted it seems) is not going to get you to the MOQ point-of-view.
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
> At 08:43 AM 5/21/2009, you wrote:
> >Marsha, I think the point is clinging to that
> >entrapment. It takes a bravery and a
> >fearlessness to overcome it. As the Sophists say
> >and many others, excellence is a practice, like
> >the entrapment. We were taught to practice s/o
> >over a long period of growth like wise we must
> >teach ourselves and reinforce excellence over a
> >long peroid of growth. The impossiblity of
> >escape disolves with the practice of excellence.
> >I have found the four agreements works well
> >within the four levels of excellence and
> >reinforces their meaning. Ruiz says that by
> >slowly breaking the agreements made with the
> >small self and replacing them with the
> >agreements of Quality, through practice we will
> >be free of it. they are: Â BE IMPECCABLE WITH
> >YOUR WORD Speak with integrity. Say only what
> >you mean. Avoid using the word to speak against
> >yourself or to gossip about others. Use the
> >power of your word in the direction of truth and
> >love. DONâEURTMT TAKE ANYTHING PERSONALLY Nothing
> >others do is because of you. What others say and
> >do is a projection of their own reality, their
> >own dream. When you are immune to the opinions
> >of others, you wonâEURTMt be the victim of needless
> >suffering. DONâEURTMT MAKE ASSUMPTIONS Find the
> >courage to ask questions and to express what you
> >really want. Communicate with others as clearly
> >as you can to avoid misunderstandings, sadness,
> >and drama. With just this one agreement, you can
> >completely transform your life. ALWAYS DO YOUR
> >BEST Your best is going to change from moment to
> >moment; it will be different when you are
> >healthy as opposed to sick. Under any
> >circumstance, simply do your best, and you will
> >avoid self-judgment, self-abuse, and regret.
> >Â Â Â ________________________________ From:
> >MarshaV <[email protected]> To:
> >[email protected] Sent: Thursday, May 21,
> >2009 5:50:48 AM Subject: Re: [MD] Protestant
> >Capitalism Ron, Don't you think Bo has a valid
> >point. It seems impossible to breakaway from
> >the subject/object chatter which is entrapment.
> >Marsha At 04:17 AM 5/21/2009, you
> >wrote: >Ron > >On 19 May you wrote: > > > Are
> >you saying that Platt is on firm MoQ ground by
> >being > > anti-intellectual? > >Yes, the
> >greatest obstacle is the 4th. level because -
> >prior to the MOQ >- it was
> >reality itself (like the 3rd and 2nd. and
> >1st have been in their >time) Platt isn't
> >"anti-intellectual", but sees the 4th. level
> >for >what it is, >namely a static level that
> >refuses a dynamic pattern to form a new >reality
> >The MOQ is of course no static level, but in
> >this particular >context it has a level-like
> >relationship with intellect. > > > Also, are you
> >saying that ALL intellectual patterns are more
> >moral than > > social patterns? > >Yes,
> >intellect is the highest static level, yet the
> >mere knowledge of the >dynamic/static context
> >(that the upper level is dependent the
> >lower >level for its own good) prevents
> >intellect from undermining its social >base. The
> >big question is if it prevents the MOQ from
> >undermining its >own base - intellect - I mean
> >if it can go on after being reduced to a >static
> >level? (footnote). > > > Essentially you are
> >saying that no one knows intellectual quality
> >unless > > they subscribe to your SOL.
> >-Ron > >That's right, but it isn't really "my
> >SOL" In ZAMM's proto-moq there is >just one
> >"static" (classic) level - the SOM - but it's
> >also called >"intellect" >so it was clearly
> >Phaedrus's original idea. And in LILA there are
> >many >indications that SOM is no foreign matter
> >that has polluted intellect, but >the very
> >article. > >IMO > >Bo > > >Footnote: >This is
> >the "intellect joining forces with biology to
> >quell society" >phenomenon brought one notch
> >up. The MOQ joining forces with >social value to
> >quell intellect. This would be a disaster and
> >why I at >times wonder about the MOQ. It's valid
> >as .... but is it GOOD? >Perhaps better let it
> >continue in its harmless "academical" vein,
> >letting . >Anthony McWatt and David Buchanan be
> >the administrators of
> >Pirsig's >legacy. > > > > > >Moq_Discuss mailing
> >list >Listinfo, Unsubscribing
> >etc. >http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_d
> >iscuss-moqtalk.org >Archives: >http://lists.moqta
> >lk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >http:/
> >/moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ .
> >_____________ The self is a thought-flow of
> >ever-changing, interrelated and interconnected,
> >inorganic, biological, social and intellectual,
> >static patterns of value responding to Dynamic
> >Quality. . . 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/
>
>
> .
> _____________
>
> The self is a thought-flow of ever-changing,
> interrelated and interconnected, inorganic,
> biological, social and intellectual, static
> patterns of value responding to Dynamic Quality.
>
> .
> .
>
>
>
> 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/
.
_____________
The self is a thought-flow of ever-changing,
interrelated and interconnected, inorganic,
biological, social and intellectual, static
patterns of value responding to Dynamic Quality.
.
.
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/
