Marsha, I understand, but to clarify, I posit that chinese language does not use abstract nouns as english and Greek does and therefore does not reify them.
I catch your meaning, lovely day here down here nice up there too? ----- Original Message ---- From: MarshaV <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 2:18:40 PM Subject: Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ Ron, Maybe some other time. I've felt for a long time that, as I stated earlier, the Intellectual Level is about manipulating objectified abstract symbols. I do not think that this is intrinsically bad, but I do think the MoQ is about ever-changing, mutually interrelated processes responding to Dynamic Quality. Making an argument by reifying 'Chinese Philosophy' does not advance your argument, and I do not have on-hand an argument to demonstrate my point-of-view. Bo takes so much heat, and is so persistent and patient, that I just felt the need to support him. For me, the Intellectual Level is the subject/object level. I don't think Bo is confusing the pointing and the moon. I think he sees the DQ/sq split changes everything, and I agree. Marsha -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of X Acto Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 1:51 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ Marsha, I do'nt want to seem as if I'm pushing, if you are into a conversation about the subject I am most interested but I do not want to seem pushy and piss you off if you would like to discuss further I am. are you? if not thats ok just pissing away some free time here at work and thought this was a discussion I'm into pursueing. -Ron ----- Original Message ---- From: MarshaV <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 1:42:37 PM Subject: Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ Ron, In my readings of Buddhism, the big obstacle to get over is always self and objects. Marsha -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of X Acto Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 1:30 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ in other words reification, ok. and I agree to a point, indo-european semetic languages have that sort of morphology. chinese and other pictographic languages do not. so when we talk of the reification of languge or abstracts it's no big deal to them. because they do not deal in abstract symbols in that manner, they do not need to reify them. In contrast, John Webb imagined that absence of morphology must constitute a sort of grand linguistic liberation, or rather the state of original freedom from which all but the Chinese have since fallen: "the Chinese are never put to that irksome vexation of searching out a radix for the derivation of any of their words, as generally all other nations are, but the radix is the word and the word is the radix . . . Besides they are not troubled with variety of Declensions, Conjugations, Numbers, Genders, Moods, Tenses and the like grammatical niceties, but are absolutely free from all such perplexing accidents, having no other Rules in use than what the light of nature has dictated unto them; whereby their language is plain, easie and simple as natural speech ought to be.13" ----- Original Message ---- From: MarshaV <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 1:18:03 PM Subject: Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ Ron, I think the MoQ's Intellectual Level is about objectifying and manipulating abstract symbols. Marsha -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of X Acto Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 12:59 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ Bo, I'm still with you. The Intellectual Level is about objectifying abstract symbols: -Marsha Ron: curious about this, because this means the bulk of chinese philosophy is not intellectual. or on the intellectual level. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_philosophy except for the school of 1000 names Logicians Main article: School of Names The logicians (School of Names) were concerned with logic, paradoxes, names and actuality (similar to Confucian rectification of names). The logician Hui Shi was a friendly rival to Zhuangzi, arguing against Taoism in a light-hearted and humorous manner. Another logician, Gongsun Long, told the famous When a White Horse is Not a Horse dialogue. This school did not thrive because the Chinese regarded sophistry and dialectic as impractical. ----- Original Message ---- From: MarshaV <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 12:50:38 PM Subject: Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ Ron, I do not have an opinion. Marsha -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of X Acto Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 12:02 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ Marsha, Do you consider Hinduism intellectual? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism ----- Original Message ---- From: MarshaV <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 11:51:09 AM Subject: Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ Bo, I'm still with you. The Intellectual Level is about objectifying abstract symbols: "Objectification is the process by which abstract concepts are treated as if they were concrete things or physical objects. In this sense the term is synonym to reification." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectification Marsha -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 1:35 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ Hi Ron 30 Aug. I had said: > > DMB entered back in the mid nineties shortly after the forming of the > > Lila Squad with an intense interest in Mythology as conveyed by Campbell > > and a conviction of this fitting with MOQ's social level (which it does) > > but he was "seduced" by Paul Turner whose mission was to debunk the SOL > > interpretation and after that ..... well without the right > > interpretation the MOQ becomes a drag, nothing fits and it can't explain > > or predict anything. Ron: > Many times, by many examples do we use to explain the benifits and the > explanitory power of the Moq as we understand it per Pirsig, which you > do not agree with even Pirsig himself. You however have yet to give > ONE example of the explanitory power your SOL provides other than your > say-so. First "the way you understand it" is that SOM is one among many intellectual patterns, and the definition of the 4th. level is "the manipulation of symbols ...etc." Is that correct The MOQ postulates an principal struggle between the lower and upper levels, that they mutually regard each other as "evil", biological life struggles to avoid death and "inorgany" does its best to prevent life. OK, why would manipulation of symbol be offensive to "society" and vice versa. This is completely illogical, while SOM (objectivity- over-subjectivity) and social values are completely incompatible. Then very generally (because I don't have LILA with me here, but I will provide quotes if needed) Pirsig says that every major conflict up through the (later) age have been varieties of the social- intellectual struggle and if so intellect must be the value of the S/O distinction (with emphasis on the "objective over subjective" part) there can't be other intellectual patterns or this would be invalid, then everything must have been a "civil war" within intellect. All intellectual pattern that Pirsig lists in LILA are based on the S/O (again the "objective over subjective" part). Free this and free that, independent this and independent that, all is about freeing everything from the social bonds by showing that these are subjective. It's more than plain that intellect must be the objective as different from subjective (the latter the pejorative term that intellect applies to everything social) The Nazi vs Democracy conflict Pirsig sees as Social values' last stand against intellect and if so Intellect must be the value of the objective freedoms and independency over what it saw as evil itself, namely the individual submission under society's demands for giving everything for the "cause". If not this would be a struggle between nazi "ideas" and democratic ditto ... which is good SOM, but not MOQ. The present "Western Values" that the Muslims hate so much (but want the economical benefits of) is clearly Intellect in the shape of democracy - not merely elections but all its shores against despotism which is the curse of the Islamic culture. Any dictator are welcomed if only dedicated to islam, no "Christian" (intellectual) distinction between religion and state. THAT in fact is the very "evil" they fight against with such ferocity ... and disregard of life, which is society's force, the individual is supposed to give its life freely to defend the "cause". > you can't even mount a convincing argue to Ham, the perfect subject > for your aims. I must first "smoke him out" and that is impossible. > one example > except, a sesame street explaination of moving the "M" from SOM > to the "M" of the MOQ. > Big Bird would be proud I don't understand your colloquialism, but now it's your turn to tell how your interpretation of the intellectual level explains things. 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/ 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/ 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/ 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/ 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/ 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/
