IMO, sitting on the hot stove represents a “value event” that triggers a reaction that demonstrates the “memory” within the biological level of static quality. The reaction is not part of social or intellectual levels and does not have to be evaluated before a response is made. IMO, a “value event” may be part of dynamic quality, but I think dynamic quality would be something different: perhaps sitting on a stove does not trigger a response because the individual has developed an “assbestos” buttocks. That would be dynamic and would become static quality if such a trait would become part of the norm where groups of people could sit on hot stoves.
Bruce Underwood > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:54:47 +0100 > Subject: Re: [MD] Why isn't the hot stove obvious? > > Mary and all who have responded to the "Hot Stove" issue. > > > IMO that "parable" is from a very early stage akin to ZAMM's "Leading > Edge" example and very useful there, but in LILA where the final MOQ > is presented becomes an enigma. It was intended as a demonstration > of how immediate Value is and in ZAMM where SOM (called > "intellect") was DQ'a sole static fall-out (..and what blocks out DQ) in > the MOQ, however, jumping from hot places becomes the workings of > the (biological) autonomous neural system. Admittedly, biology is more > basic than society and intellect, but nevertheless a static level, so > Pirsig's obsession with the Reality=Quality issue obscures the MOQ. . > > An aside: The autonomous neural system is interesting enough. Some > of you may know the Benjamin Libet experiments that created such a > furor in the eighties. The signal propagation through nerves isn't very > fast, it takes (I believe) half a second from toe to brain, but stepping > on a "hot stove" makes you jump immediately - while the signal only is > at knee level. So it's not any brain involved, but now comes the really > weird part. WHEN the signal finally reaches the brain it "forwards" the > feeling of pain in time so as to match the moment you step on the > tack. This is really "occult". > > Why don't we see "Quality coming"?: > >> If all is Quality, why can't we see it coming? What do we lack in order >> to predict the ultimate outcome or goal of Quality? At the various >> levels, why do we not universally agree on what the highest Quality >> outcome would be? Why, for example, has there been recent disagreement >> here surrounding the best behavior of government? Should we not be able >> to all equally discern this? Shouldn't recognition of Quality at all >> levels be as intuitive as the hot stove? > > NB. Quality is MOQ's DQ) > > Mary speaks much like Phaedrus in ZAMM: "Why don't we > intellectually recognize Quality"? And the answer is that INTELLECT IS > SOM where quality is a less-than-real subjective phenomenon. Young > Phaedrus realized this and presented an alternative MOQ where > SOM=intellect, but for some reason Pirsig of LILA de-fused this by the > bland mind-like intellectual level which leaves the MOQ as > revolutionary as a cup of old tea. > > I don't know if Mary is the address here, but just for the gallery: > > For the MOQ to be revolutionary SOM must be made its highest static > level - all of it, every last bit!! If SOM is made one intellectual pattern > and the MOQ another, the 4th. level becomes SOM's mind - a mental > container where ideas reside - and SOM goes on unperturbed. > > For Pirsig the Reality=Quality issue and proofs thereof was his > obsession. If that was established he regarded the mission as > accomplished, the MOQ just one possible ordering of Quality. But the > Reality=Quality is part and parcel of the MOQ, namely its first axiom > and axioms can't be proved. The proof is in the result of such a > quality-ordered universe, and in that respect the MOQ (in its true SOL > interpretation) is matchless. I haven't found one single weak point. > > 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/ _________________________________________________________________ Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222985/direct/01/ 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/
