All kinds of greetings Andre. You asked: > When you say: 'The only way to understand the MoQ is by accepting that > intellect is the S/O aggregate. What do you mean?
I mean that no trace of mind or matter - SEPARATELY - must enter the MOQ unless it becomes a SOM derivation, the only way to render it harmless is to relegate SOM the role of the 4th.level, i.e. as an aggregate. That way the 4th. level is no more mental than corporeal, but the very distinction .... along with all SOM's dualities. All intellectual patterns that LILA lists are S/O-related in the objective- over-subjective sense and I just can't understand how Pirsig could write LILA without drawing the "intellect=SOM" conclusion, but alas, he had committed himself to the "inorg.+org=objective/ socio.+intell = subjective" way of subsuming SOM, and could not switch to the "4th. level=SOM". > Objects referring to the inorganic/organic (patternd) level and > subjects referring to the social/intellectual (patterned) level? Or > good old objects referring to 'matter' (in MoQ terms the inorganic > level) and subjects referring to 'mind' (in MoQ terms the intellectual > level). Right, here is the said "subsumption" procedure, but the quality of "being alive" is not objective. Pirsig may mean that organism are "visible" or "tangible", but "social patterns" are just as visible an/or tangible. Had Pirsig just said: "From SOM seen MOQ's two lower levels may be seen as "objective" ...etc. ..."subjective" but he actually says: (Lila's Child) "...they belong to the material .. respectively .. mental world" as if MOQ's lower level really are MATTER and the upper really are MIND! . > Answer to Q1: by the S/O aggregate I > mean.................................. . ... that SOM's assertion that some phenomena are subjective and other are objective is false, you can't have one without the other, i.e an aggregate.. > Second question: > What is the relationship of 'intellect' to the MoQ intellectual level? >From inside the intellectual level the term "intellect" means thinking in general. From inside MOQ the intellectual level is the value of the S/O "thinking" (in the objective-over-subjective sense). > Answer to Q2: the relationship between intellect and the MoQ > intellectual level > is.................................................................... ...... that seen from inside the intellectual level the S/O distinction is absolute - hence SOM - while seen from the MOQ the separation isn't absolute - mere static - yet the highest static value.. NB "..from inside the intellectual level" I mean while it was SOM. After having seen the Quality Context one can't "be inside" intellect in its old SOM capacity. In the same sense that after having seen the S/O context (intellect) one couldn't be "inside" the social level, and after the social level had been reached the pure biological existence wasn't possible. > Bodvar, this may seem to be belittling but is not meant that way. > Please be precise and clear. We all want to comprehend what your > understanding and experience of the MoQ is. It has obviously made a > deep impact on the way you experience your life. I try, oh, how I try. > Dear Bodvar...please, please, please...keep it simple and concise. Likewise. But thanks for formulating these concise questions. 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/
