Steve and Horse and the whole menagerie. On 30/03/2010:
Steve: > > In the equation "2+2=4" where are the subjects and and where are the > > objects? Bo: This alleged "refutation" of the SOL (based on Pirsigs "Higher mathematics.....etc. having no subject/object content") is based on the misunderstanding that calculation being Q-intellect, while it is merely calculation that the mankind has performed since time immemorial. At least as long as it has manipulated symbols in the form of language. Totally irrelevant. The Babylonians and Egyptians (Hammurabi was a social level inhabitant according to Pirsig, remember?) calculate and reckoned using complicated mathematics for instance the Pythagorean logic that Pyth. - and the Greek intellectuals - made into proofs and theorems to - OBJECTIVELY - show how & why works. Horse: > There aren't any - and there's even less in 0! Nice posts by the way > Horse Bo: FYI: The SOL does NOT say that the 4th level consists of subjects and objects, rather it is the SOM (the "objective-over-subject" approach) without its "M"!!!! 30 March Steve wrote (to Marsha:) > Pirsig's intellect--the manipulations of symbols--does not require us > to attach any ontological significance to the symbols as subjective > stuff and material stuff. To the MOQer, the symbols don't refer to any > kind of "stuff." The symbols are patterns of value, and they stand for > more patterns of value. There is no "stuff" to speak of except as a > sort of pattern of value. It is patterns all the way down. "Pirsig's intellect" has varied from ".. equal to mind" (letter to Anthony) to ".. no use to speak about intellect before the Greeks" which (correctly) indicates SOM, but for confusion's sake he added the "manipulation of symbols". Now, all quotes who Mary brought indicates that intellect's purpose is to control social value and I wonder how manipulation of symbols can do that job and - moreover - how it can be an offence to social value all the time that language is manipulation and has been around since time immemorial . The true intellectual value is under your noses, but no one wishes to "see through that telescope", a mystery all the time that so much of the Pirsig's supports the SOL All this about symbols not stuff is kindergarten "stuff" and totally unasked for, but with enough "ontology" and "cosmology" interspersed it sounds very learned ..and the MOQ can go on as another somish toothless idea. Steve forbade me to reply, a new tactics in the hope that his bluffs will not be called. 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/md/archives.html
