Hi Ron On 6 July you wrote:
> No, it's don't look into YOUR telescope, Pirsig clearly states that > MoQ and SOM are two ways to view one set of data, that of dynamic > quality. You want to interpet MoQ objectively and apply this to it's > heirarchy of levels. for example: The MOQ postulates that Quality is reality's ground and this Quality is the DQ of its DQ/SQ configuration. Do you agree? Just to prevent the Quality/MOQ. SOM on the other hand has no "set of data" which is split, it merely postulates one objective (matter) reality and one subjective (mind) reality. Now, to make the S/O split a split of Quality it must be made into MOQ's intellectual level, that's the only possible placement that meets all requirements, but instead of everyone agreeing with this obvious fact I'm ostracized. I had said: > > You seem oblivious to the fact that the first DQ/SQ distinction is > > the inorganic one and its perception of value is not by concepts nor > > is the biological, only with the social level and language did > > concepts enter the scene. > Ron: > Well if that doesent sound like an objective opinion of when > subjective interpretation comes into existence, I don't know what is. Listen. If one accepts MOQ's premises - among those that the first static level is the inorganic one, this is no longer SOM's "objective" part (matter) consequently your accusation of objectivization is groundless. > Bo, the only way we view ANYTHING is via social level and intellectual > level, this goes for the view of the inorganic and biological levels, > the view of these levels is ALLWAYS from the social and intellectual > levels viewpoint. More nonsense. We are committed to a view from MOQ's meta- level! Basta!! > Since all inorganic and biological patterns are viewed from the > perspective of the social and intellectual levels, they are understood > as concepts. Had you just stuck to the intellectual level view - like Pirsig in the infamous annotation about ideas creating matter ...etc - you would have been a mere ... (deleted) but adding the social makes you a complete ...(deleted) > Inorganic and biological patterns are dynamic quality and all our > explainations and interpretations of it (this includes SOM & MoQ) is > from the perspective of social and intellectual level (static) > patterns. Inorganic and biological patterns as DQ! Are you serious? > There is no Gods eye view Bo. If you think MoQ relieves us of our > social and intellectual level viewpoint and gives us a gods eye view, > you are missing the point of a MoQ, thats the first bugaboo that MoQ > destroys. Pirsig opens LILA with the correct statement that no one can avoid metaphysics, meaning no on can live without a grand view, call it God's Eye or whatever. You can go to the remotest tribe in the inner New Guinea (if there are any left) and they invariable presents you with a mythology (social level metaphysics) of their origin and destiny. When you come back to the Western world you are confronted with the intellectual level's metaphysics (SOM) of Big Bang ..etc. The MOQ is now introducing a metaphysics that will unite all in the one grand unification theory GUT. But the enormity of it is too much for all you midgets to understand. Too bad Bodvar 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/
