Bodvar to Andre: 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.. Andre: (deep sigh.... this isn't going to be easy)...it has been my understanding of the MoQ position that all 'phenomena' are static PoV's. (nothing subjective/objective). Regarding the 'warming-up' to this answer (the Mind/Matter reference) I agreed with you before (seems like years ago) that I thought it unfortunate that Pirsig re-introduced these terms in LILA. I have since learned to apply these terms very loosely to said levels. For me, they are firmly considered and experienced as evolved PoV's. Bodvar: > 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.. Andre: The MoQ has broken the 'stronghold' of SOM (i.e its suggestion that the world c.q.reality is made up of subjects and objects) by positing Quality as Reality from which static patterns of value are abstracted. This 'process', this 'event' is been placed within a moral, evolutionary framework. Bodvar, I sense that the difficulty I have is that you keep on placing SOM's 'highest static value' ( i.e its non-absoluteness) at the intellectual level to the exclusion of anything else. Firstly, the MoQ maintains that the division of reality into subjects and objects is a high quality intellectual PoV. It doesn't have an issue with this. It does have an issue with it in that it denies the existence of value. LILA goes through much pain to show the 'conversion' of SOM into MoQ by changing all into PoV's and thereby resolving many platypi.But here I maintain Pirsig's stance (and I agree wholeheartedly with Marsha) that,as soon as you talk/write/think about something it has 'become' static. The MoQ is a higher static intellectual pattern of quality than SOM. Not only because of its greater explanatory power but because it maintains that these explanations are provisional, always, because Quality (reality) cannot be explained..only by approximation. I cannot accept that the intellectual level is SOM's sole domain. And you say it here: 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. But I realise you mean something different here. You are suggesting the MoQ should have its own level. Now, I may be wrong but I think you are underestimating the 'level' of freedom afforded at the intellectual level. It is DQ/SQ's highest achievement yet, because it is bathed in Quality in an open-ended (Zen) circle. Thanks for your effort Bodvar. No more questions at this stage. You may throw some back at me... maybe. Kind regards Andre 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/
