Andre
29 Sep.
You had said::
> > ?I am beginning to wonder to what extent the intellectual level
> > dominates the play in patterning the undifferentiated? Just
> > laterally drifting.
Bodvar:
> Intellect is? the highest and best "patterner". However, if intellect
> is "patterning the undifferentiated" ? IMO it re-patterns all? lower
> levels' pattern in its own subject/object matrix.
Andre:
> Perhaps I misunderstand this one Bodvar but if it patterns all lower
> levels in its own matrix isn't that the ultimate SOM configuration?
> The one we have supposedly emerged from with the MoQ? (Is this the
> point you are making??).
Sure, intellect is the subject/object configuration. You wonder how this
could the spawn the MOQ . is that it? The point is that all levels
emerges "in spite of" its parent level. Remember how Pirsig hammers
on the unlikelihood of life emerging out of the inorganic level, where all
"forces" seem hell-bent on preventing life and will kill it at the first
chance (the biology professor in the sun)
> I am asking this because I do not understand the remainder of the
> paragraph..i.e about being DQ junkies.
A bit uncalled for that one ... by me.
> You see, I thought there were five moral systems within the MoQ
> 'connecting' the four levels, each of which has very little to say to
> the other (they are 'discrete'), they have their own agenda, and do not
> understand each other's 'language'. The inorganic level is patterned
> according to the laws of physics, the organic level is patterned
> according to the laws of nature etc etc. this seems to me to be a
> participatory process of DQ/SQ not intellect 'on its own' (otherwise
> you'd get into an idealist frame n'est pas?).
C'est vrai. From LILA:
What the evolutionary structure of the Metaphysics of Quality
shows is that there is not just one moral system. There are
many. In the Metaphysics of Quality there's the morality called
the "laws of nature," by which inorganic patterns triumph over
chaos; there is a morality called the "law of the jungle" where
biology triumphs over the inorganic forces of starvation and
death; there's a morality where social patterns triumph over
biology, "the law;" and there is an intellectual morality, which is
still struggling in its attempts to control society. Each of these
sets of moral codes is no more related to the other than novels
are to flip-flops.
> Anyway, I'll try not to get too smart either which isn't difficult.
> Why do I find the MoQ so difficult? How is a six-year-old to make
> sense of any of this?
;-) Yes, that's a "#ยค%&/ question. I think Pirsig meant that Value being
reality itself everything - dead or alive - would reacts to it and that may
be correct, but one must - first - be a socially aware, then intellectually
capable before fathoming a reality above intellect. That takes
intelligence in "afterburner" mode ;-)
IMO
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/
