[Bo]
Wonder what Arlo and Steve say if they spot it?
[Arlo]
Arlo would say that he agrees with Pirsig, that the MOQ is just
another finger pointing at the moon. Arlo would say that "S/O"
interactions begin at the social level, inherent the very act of
symbolically encoding experience. Arlo does not see S/O patterns
(which, as he just said, begins at the social level) as the "problem"
of intellect, but the consideration of their PRIMACY. The MOQ, as all
symbolically encoded understandings, simply says that a better
intellectual pattern than one that sees the S/O split as primary, is
one that sees Quality as primary.
Thus, Arlo does not "fault" intellect for extending S/O encodings
that begin at the social level, but rather a SOM that elevates this
S/O distinction to being primary. Arlo sees the MOQ as, also,
extending S/O encodings (by virtue of it being a symbolically encoded
pattern) but denying their primacy. Instead the MOQ points to a
primacy that precedes the S/O distinction.
But it, like any and all other symbolically encoded descriptions, can
only "point", as the "ineffible" (to quote Platt) is always and
everywhere only approachable through metaphor/analogy. As such, Arlo
sees the intellectual level as that which considers the socially
began S/O encodings as "things" in and of themselves. SOM-intellect
concludes they are "real", the primary distinction of the world.
MOQ-intellect says they are secondary, illusions cast out of a more
primary event, Quality.
But Arlo doubts you are genuinely interested in what Arlo has to say,
as he has been down that road before. Since Arlo does not agree with
Bo, it invariable leads only to comments about how stupid Arlo is not
to recognize the genius of Bo.
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/
