Ian, Am I understanding this correctly, it is thought that Bo sees the Intellectual Level as one pattern alone. I don't think so. Like the definition of the patterns in the Social Level might be expanded to say 'patterns of culture that anthropologist and sociologists study', so the definition of patterns in the Intellectual Level can be explained by 'patterns objectified for analytical thinking'.
It has been suggested that Aztec patterns were somehow intellectual but not objectifying, but like one of Einstein's thought experiments presented to Bohr, the measurement (the process of determination and explanation) IS objectification every step of the way. What is built by objectification is based on objectification, and any further MoQ-like projection is wishful thinking. Marsha -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ian Glendinning Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 1:33 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] Loneliness Hi Ant, Bo, Marsha, I think that is helpful Ant, It's kinda what Marsha was saying too. If we "objectify" the patterns too much - as primary objects - we've defeated the whole point of MoQ. It's the qualty and its relative static / dynamic aspects that interest us. But Bo, Intellect is not "a pattern" in anyone's book (not even yours I suspect ?). It's a whole level in the MoQ SOM-Intellect is a pattern, maybe a pattern of patterns, but MoQ-Enhanced-Intellect is clearly a better one - is the point where we keep differing. I'm just trying find a simple language to have a conversation with you about the MoQ ... what it is and how we use it, etc. But, in fact if you see the whole of intellect as a simply static pattern, you have clearly totally missed the MoQ - so all other bets are off. Regards Ian On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 1:10 AM, Ant McWatt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Bo, > >From what I remember (from correspondence), Pirsig says (as a general rule of thumb), that the Quality he discusses in ZMM is the same as the Dynamic Quality in LILA. This is seen, for instance, in the passages in ZMM when he equates the Tao in the "Tao Te Ching" with (Dynamic) Quality. > It's also worth reminding new readers to Pirsig's work that the (static or) conventional MOQ (of LILA) states that Quality = Dynamic Quality + the static quality patterns (the MOQ being just one of many static intellectual patterns...) while in my PhD (see http://robertpirsig.org/PhD.htm), it's seen that there is also a Dynamic (or the "World of Buddhas") perspective of the MOQ where all static quality patterns are seen simply as secondary, ephemeral manifestations of Dynamic Quality. > > I hope that's helpful. > 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/
