Mary, Bo, Horse, et al .. Mary said "As to where I would "put" the MoQ I would say that it along with Buddhism rest above the four static levels"
Above ... exactly. That's one option I've offered Bo many many many times. If we want to "define" intellect as SOMism fine, just treat post-SOMist intellect as a new higher more dynamic level. We end up with the same model. GOF (static) SOMist intellect with new enlightened MOQ thinking evolving (dynamically) out of it (if we let it). DMB has described this in most detail recently. The problem is, as this highly-personal thread indicates, is that some seem not to want to let that happen, but for ideological reasons to stick intelligent thinking in a closed box - force it to remain static - under the social control and mockery of dogma. Clearly nothing was further from Pirsig's intent. Clearly Pirsig didn't / none of us want to see static SOMist intellectuals governing anything - anti-SOMist-intellectual is OK - it's the point in fact. Anti-dynamic-intellectual is not OK - it's prejudiced dogma. BTW Horse, great to have you as an active participant in recent times - that quote from Lila's Child I had not noticed the significance of before. Reinforces my view that "The Old Plant" really is Pirsig himself, playing us all along as devil's advocate, there is no other explanation of Platt I can live with as a real human. Sodding internet. Regards Ian On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 1:49 AM, Mary <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Horse, > > Ah ha. 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
