Bo
First of all LILA is no intellectual pattern, but a MOQ pattern that has a
sub-set (a static level) called "intellect". The fact that it is a book with
signs on paper does not make it any more "intellectual" than Egyptian
hieroglyphs ... or the "Old books of the Bible" that Pirsig declared
without intellectual content.
You're half right, but have always missed the point about "things" being made of
different levels at the same time.
The signs on the paper are made of ink, and the same book in electronic form is
made of ones and zeros, or transistors in different states if you will. That's
not what we mean by something like "have you read Lila"? When we ask that, we
don't care whether it was read in a book, in English, Norwegian, Swedish or if
it was read on a computer. What we mean is whether we have read the content,
i.e. the intellectual patterns stored/represented by those ink signs or
transistor states. The content is the intellectual patterns.
And BTW, I have no idea what you mean by 'a MOQ pattern that has a sub-set (a
static level) called "intellect"'? How does that fit into the MoQ with a first
division of DQ/SQ and then SQ into the static levels? It seems you have added
another division somewhere.
Language proper surely started as a social means (pattern) of
communication, but "patterns-to-meaning mapping"? An animal can
well "map" the meaning of bared fangs or an amoeba the meaning of
sulfuric acid. But the lower level can't "map" the patterns of the higher
thus intellect-dwellers can't recognize the MOQ but keep insisting that
LILA is an intellectual artefact.
The meaning of bared fangs and the meaning of sulfuric acid are two very
different things. Bared fangs has a meaning, it's pure communication. On the
other hand, sulfuric acid destroys the amoeba's inorganic patterns, it doesn't
stand a chance to do one thing or the other when it hits. An animal seeing bared
fangs can fight or flee.
Without that mapping, the text is nothing but ink. Or in other words,
the intellectual patterns are dependent on the social pattern language.
Well, without knowing the language words are just sounds and without
understanding the MOQ language LILA is just an intellectual "sound".
Lila is no different than any other book from an intellectual perspective. And
there is no MoQ level above the intellectual that you somehow need to acquire to
understand the MoQ
This is of particular concern with the intellectual level. You said
Lila, the text, is an intellectual pattern. How do you know? How is
it we make this distinction? How do we you know that distinction is
correct?
Had D.T. asked this from the MOQ premises it would have been most
apt. As mentioned, LILA is no more intellectual than the hieroglyhs
were, but is as inscrutable to intellect-dwellers as the hieroglyphs were
before the Rosetta Stone.
Not really sure how to answer that without reciting large parts of the
essay. I guess my way of knowing is that I have, at least to myself,
made a clear distinction of what is what and how everything sticks
together. I spent a few years trying to find holes in that system,
resulting in a slightly revised system and the first essay. I still
try to find holes in my system, but as time goes by and I still can't
find any, I tend to increase my sense of knowing these things you ask.
I just found a hole bigger than the solar system.
Would you mind pointing with a bigger pen? I missed it completely.
From the essay:
³Intellectual patterns use the language provided by the society to
simulate another layer of static quality. By doing this,
intellectual patterns can build models of its own reality and
manipulate the models without manipulating the reality.
Intellectual Quality Events are associations, inspiration etc.²
[Undressing on MoQ site]
Don't you think social level cultures - the Egyptians or Babylonians
f.ex. - could build models, carry out calculations, or simply think in
beforehand how things could be made? Only they had not achieved
the intellectual lingo about "manipulating models different from Reality"
They surely had as many association and inspirations as ourselves.
Of course they could, which of course means they had just as much insight into
the intellectual level as we do.
Magnus
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/
