Horse and Menagerie.
17 Apr.
You said to Platt
> Your Pirsig quote comes from that part of Lila's Child where you are
> supporting Bo's (now) SOL idea and Pirsig disagrees with you (and as
> a consequence Bo) about the MoQ being a SOM document based on SOM
> reasoning:
and added a LC annotation [132]:
It employs SOM reasoning the way SOM reasoning employs
social structures such as courts and journals and learned
societies to make itself known. SOM reasoning is not
subordinate to these social structures, and the MOQ is not
subordinate to the SOM structures it employs. Remember that
the central reality of the MOQ is not an object or a subject or
anything else. It is understood by direct experience only and
not by reasoning of any kind. Therefore to say that the MOQ is
based on SOM reasoning is as useful as saying that the Ten
Commandments are based on SOM reasoning. It doesn't tell
us anything about the essence of the Ten Commandments
and it doesn't tell us anything about the essence of the MOQ.
But this does not fit your cause, rather the SOL: "It (the MOQ)
employs SOM reasoning ...etc. does more than anything shows that
the MOQ is something above and in the position of "employing" SOM
in the upper-lower level fashion, and the lower (SOM) must be
intellect . And the following: "..the way SOM employs social structures"
affirms that SOM must be = intellect to employ the social level.
BTW: It's quite a feat to write this and NOT see the Sun (SOL)
> Pirsig's notes 129, 131 and 133 also specifically disagree with Bo's
> idea about SOM as the Intellectual level - for which you show
> agreement. Why is it that when Pirsig states quite categorically
> that both you and Bo are wrong about SOL - even going so far as to
> say that your conclusions undermine the MoQ - you ignore everything
> he says.
It is because "Lila's Child" contains some embarrassing and anti-
moqish utterances that even DMB protested before being "seduced"
by Paul Turner. I will not start on this sad business, but point to the
Turner letter where Pirsig almost accepts the SOL, but true to tradition
provides enough ambiguity to leave room for such false remarks like
yours
> Pirsig states quite categorically that both you and Bo are wrong about
> SOL - even going so far as to say that your conclusions undermine the
> MoQ
To me he said that if the SOL had quality it would "percolate to the top"
meaning its up to us to decide.
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
