There are times when rationality fails and all we have is a code,
our current language, where we can try to make sense of things. It
is a low Quality moment. As it is a low Quality moment when someone
near us dies. It leaves us wordless and sorry and I think that's all
we have got, together with the memories. It is sad that there is
death. Why does it exist in a Quality Universe? It is senseless and
stupid, unless we put a sense on it. We must learn to mourn the dead
who are dear to us. We could try to fulfill the void and emptiness
that such a death leaves with the support of each other and with the
notion that, although there is darkness and evil in the Cosmos, most
of it is filled with happiness and awe. Indeed some deaths are
stupid, or are the fruit of ignorance and plain evil. I care for my
life and the life of the ones near us. Death is stupid. It is
sometimes hard to carry on with our lives in the face of it. How
should we react in the face of evil? Is it poking fun of us? Is it
trying to give us a "lesson"? I am sorry. I feel sad. Is there an
answer on to how to mend things up? Phylosophy does help us, but in
the end we live in a world of logic and guessing. And it will never
change.
Today I have found my shadow and I can only feel sorry.
Fernando.
----- Mensagem de [email protected] ---------
Data: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 06:05:35 -0700 (PDT)
De: X Acto <[email protected]>
Endereço para Resposta (Reply-To): [email protected]
Assunto: {Spam?} Re: [MD] [MD} The relativity of the MoQ
Para: [email protected]
Hi Bo
30 Aug.
You 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.
Bo:
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
Ron:
The skillful manipulation of abstract symbols which have no
corresponding
experience.
Bo:
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.
Ron:
Typically this function was reserved for an elite ruling class
in the social level of kings and priests it was their agreement of
truth
that members of a society must follow. To challenge this class was
to
challenge society, a social evil. Being able to read was a social
evil
an educated society was a social evil. Democracy was a social evil.
Any one of those things have nothing to do with objectivism in a
society.
but it does have alot to do with self governance when the members
of a
society choose, create, interpret and agree to those abstract
symbols
which have no corresponding experience we have the intellectual
level
emerging from social level rule of thought, people thinking for
themselves
is evil and threatening to a social system rule.
Bo:
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.
Ron:
Actually you are correct, everything is a kind of a"civil war"
within
intellect.
Bo:
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.
Ron:
The reason you see it that way is that democracy challenges the
social domination of the elite few. You lump objectivism in with
the idea of democracy. The Iroquois ran democratic systems without
objectivism for one example. The romans had a democratic republic
before the rule
of the ceszars which took intellectual control once again up until
the enlightenment age with the rule of kings once again.
The blossoming of the intellectual level is the blossoming of a
democratic republic no matter how they concieve of reality.
which is why objectivism flourished in the 18th and 19th centuries,
the freedom of individual thought from social domination of church
and king.
see(Orwells 1984).
Bo:
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".
Ron:
What they "hate" is the biological freedom western objectivism has
unleashed, that which they have worked so hard to repress and
according
to the MoQ they are justified in hating an intellectual pattern
that
undercuts
that social restraint of biological patterns. Intellectually they
are
ruthlessly
destroying those patterns which destroy social control over biology
and thats
objectivism and since objectivism dominates western society, they
are out
to ruthlessly destroy us.
Ron prev:
you can't even mount a convincing argue to Ham, the perfect
subject
for your aims.
Bo:
I must first "smoke him out" and that is impossible.
Ron:
mmmmmm smoked ham.
Ron prev:
one example
except, a sesame street explaination of moving the "M" from SOM
to the "M" of the MOQ.
Big Bird would be proud
Bo:
I don't understand your colloquialism, but now it's your turn to
tell how
your interpretation of the intellectual level explains things.
Ron:
See above, I think you confuse the historical evolution of
the intellectual pattern of self governance of a society with
the historical evolution of the intellectual patten of objectivism.
You view them as one in the same, which is understandable,
but it is also the reason why you disagree with 3/4 of Pirsigs
MoQ.
I truly believe, that public education, literacy and democracy
within a society are the hallmarks of the intellectual level
not objectivsm in and of itself.
Objectivism as an intellectual pattern coincides with all of
Pirsigs
work not just select portions of ZMM. plus it coincides with
MoQ's base philosophy, Pragmatism, Zen Buddhism Hindu
and a host of other established eastern and western philosophies
both ancient and modern not to mention current understanding
in modern physics.
And all you have supplied Bo is an explaination based on your
interpretaion
of Pirsigs work, not any kind of an example of SOL's explanitory
power.
I'm still waiting.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org[1]
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/[2]
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/[3]
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org[4]
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/[5]
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/[6]
----- Final da mensagem de [email protected] -----
Links:
------
[1]
http://webmail.mls.com.br/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.moqtalk.org%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Fmoq_discuss-moqtalk.org
[2]
http://webmail.mls.com.br/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.moqtalk.org%2Fpipermail%2Fmoq_discuss-moqtalk.org%2F
[3]
http://webmail.mls.com.br/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmoq.org.uk%2Fpipermail%2Fmoq_discuss_archive%2F
[4]
http://webmail.mls.com.br/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.moqtalk.org%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Fmoq_discuss-moqtalk.org
[5]
http://webmail.mls.com.br/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.moqtalk.org%2Fpipermail%2Fmoq_discuss-moqtalk.org%2F
[6]
http://webmail.mls.com.br/horde/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmoq.org.uk%2Fpipermail%2Fmoq_discuss_archive%2F
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/
