Bravo! On Mar 21, 2010, at 11:35 AM, Mary wrote: > Some quotes from Lila for Horse... > > . Is society > going to dominate intellect or is intellect going to dominate society? And > if society wins, what's going to be left of intellect? And if intellect > wins what's going to be left of society? > > . Intellect is > not an extension of society any more than society is an extension of > biology. Intellect is going its own way, and in doing so is at war with > society, seeking to subjugate society > > Ch 21 > Once intellect has been let out of the bottle of social restraint, > it is almost impossible to put it back in again. And it is immoral to try. > A society that tries to restrain the truth for its own purposes is a lower > form of evolution than a truth that restrains society for its own purposes. > > Ch 22 > When the social climate changes from > preposterous social restraint of all intellect to a relative abandonment of > all social patterns, the result is a hurricane of social forces. That > hurricane is the history of the twentieth century. > > , the day Socrates died to establish the independence > of intellectual patterns from their social origins. Or the day Descartes > decided to start with himself as an ultimate source of reality. These were > days of evolutionary transformation. > > that if he had to pick one day when the shift from social > domination of intellect to intellectual domination of society took place, > he would pick November 11, 1918, Armistice Day, the end of World War I. > And if he had to pick one person who symbolized this shift more than any > other, he would have picked President Woodrow Wilson. > The picture of him Phædrus would have selected is one in which Wilson rides > through New York City in an open touring car, doffing the magnificent silk > hat that symbolized his high rank in Victorian society. For a cutline he > would select something from Wilson's penetrating speeches that symbolized > his high rank in the intellectual community: We must use our intelligence > to stop future war; social institutions can not be trusted to function > morally by themselves; they must be guided by intellect. Wilson belonged > in both worlds, Victorian society and the new intellectual world of the > twentieth century: the only university professor ever to be elected > president of the United States. > > New technology fueled the change. > > . The mastery of all > these new changes was no longer dominated by social skills. It required a > technologically trained, analytic mind. A horse could be mastered if your > resolve was firm, your disposition pleasant and fear absent. The skills > required were biological and social. But handling the new technology was > something different. Personal biological and social qualities didn't make > any difference to machines. > > The times were chaotic, but it was a chaos of social patterns only. > > But it was only social value patterns being > destroyed by new intellectual formulations. > The events that excited people in the twenties were events that dramatized > the new dominance of intellect over society. > > Literature emphasized the > struggle of the noble, free-thinking individual against the crushing > oppression of evil social conformity. The Victorians were damned for their > narrow-mindedness, their social pretentiousness. The test of what was > good, of what had Quality, was no longer "Does it meet society's approval?" > but "Does it meet the approval of our intellect?" > > It was this issue of intellect versus society that made the Scopes trial of > 1925 such a journalistic sensation. > > Only religious fanatics and ignorant Tennessee > hillbillies opposed the teaching of Evolution. > > . Communism and socialism, > programs for intellectual control over society, were confronted by the > reactionary forces of fascism, a program for the social control of > intellect. Nowhere were the intellectuals more intense in their > determination to overthrow the old order. > > Phædrus thought that no other historical or political analysis explains the > enormity of these forces as clearly as does the Metaphysics of Quality. > > The gigantic power of socialism and fascism, which have overwhelmed this > century, is explained by a conflict of levels of evolution. This conflict > explains the driving force behind Hitler not as an insane search for power > but as an all-consuming glorification of social authority and hatred of > intellectualism. His anti-Semitism was fueled by anti-intellectualism. > His hatred of communists was fueled by anti-intellectualism. His > exaltation of the German volk was fueled by it. His fanatic persecution of > any kind of intellectual freedom was driven by it. > In the United States the economic and social upheaval was not so great as > in Europe, but Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal, nevertheless, became > the center of a lesser storm between social and intellectual forces. The > New Deal was many things, but at the center of it all was the belief that > intellectual planning by the government was necessary for society to regain > its health. > >> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 6:14 AM from Horse >> >> Hi Mary >> >> The Intellectual Level is created by Intellectual Patterns of Value. >> Not all Intellectual Pattens of Value are either subjects or objects. > > [Mary Replies] > Hi Horse! > Speaking with absolute respectfulness and sincerity, you will have to > explain to me what Intellectual Patterns are not subjects or objects. > Seriously. I cannot think of any. > >> This creates a problem for Bo so he has to try and re-classify those >> Intellectual Patterns which are not S/O as Social Patterns. > [Mary Replies] > If you are referring to things like Buddhism, then you'll have to explain to > me how those differ from any other belief system, since we should be able to > agree that belief systems in general reside in the Social Level. > >> This creates all sorts of problems and results in a mangling of the MoQ >> in order to accommodate Bo's ideas. >> A Metaphysics is an Intellectual Pattern of Value and SOM is one of a >> number of metaphysical systems (S/O, Process, Quality etc.- and this is >> only the Western systems - there are plenty more Eastern based systems) >> and all exist within the Intellectual level and are created by IPOV. > [Mary Replies] > Perhaps, but it could be argued that all Metaphysics is an attempt to > construct a belief system. > >> Creating new levels for each metaphysics is absurd. > [Mary Replies] > I agree with that. > >> Are you, like Bo, denying that those huge bodies of Eastern philosophy >> (which are not SOM) are not Intellectual Patterns of Value when they >> emerged without the benefit of SOM? Are you saying that all non-SOM >> metaphysical systems are either variations of SOM or only exist at the >> Social level? > [Mary Replies] > To clarify, I'd need you to name the Eastern philosophies you are referring > to so I could read about them, but in general I would say they are probably > Social Level POVs. > >> Do you see where this is leading? Bo has to dismiss, deny or denigrate >> everything that Pirsig has said which is/are counter to Bo's mistaken >> notions - implying that Pirsig is so foolish and naive that he doesn't >> even understand his own work!!!! >> Additionally, he dishonestly claims that Pirsig pretty much agrees with >> him that his pet theory is correct, even when Pirsig specifically >> rejects this in the same letter! > [Mary Replies] > I love you and I love Bo. You are both what I consider to be old friends > from long ago. I think I see your point, though I don't really agree with > it, and I also see Bo's, though not in the same way Bo does. > > I don't recall Pirsig denouncing Eastern Philosophy in Lila. He basically > omitted the subject. He wrote a book targeting Western readers in a Western > context to challenge Western patterns of thought. He was being highly > critical of subject-object metaphysics - which is the entire basis for all > of Western science and Western religion. He does owe Eastern philosophy a > great debt. Based on my (admittedly limited) understanding of Eastern > philosophy, he took it and ran with it. > > The Metaphysics of Quality is something entirely new. A workable way to > modify SOM <for the Western mind> using Buddhism as its base. This became > clear to me reading Khoo's posts of the last month or so. That's not meant > to denigrate Pirsig's accomplishment at all! What he did was a gigantic > mental leap, one I think would only be possible for someone with a profound > understanding of both Eastern and Western philosophies. He is showing us a > way forward using the best of both worlds. > > Best wishes, > Mary > >> >> Cheers >> >> >> Horse >> >> >> >> >> >> On 21/02/2010 23:36, Mary wrote: >>> HI Horse, >>> >>> Wow. I tend to agree with Bo. At least most of what he says. The >>> Intellectual Level is SOM. Please explain how I am incorrect. I am >> not >>> arguing, would just like to know. >>> >>> Mary >>> >>> - The most important thing you will ever make is a realization. >>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of >> arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but to skid >> in sideways, chocolate in one hand, wine in the other, body thoroughly >> used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"... >> Hunter S Thompson
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/md/archives.html
