Greetings Dan, For me, all that is known is ever-changing, dependent, impermanent patterns.
When I label intellectual patterns as SOM I am describing how they are perceived, or how they function in consciousness. I-spov represent reified concepts and the rules for their manipulation. Intellectual patterns create false boundaries, giving the illusion of independence, or 'thingness'. I understand this fourth level to represent a formalized subject/object level where the subjective is supposedly stripped from the experience to reveal an objective truth. Marsha On May 2, 2010, at 12:03 AM, Dan Glover wrote: > Hello everyone > > On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Mary <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> My question centers around the nature of belief. How do we become >> convinced? What is necessary to achieve the state of being convinced of >> anything? It seems much easier to convince a child of anything than to >> convince an adult. >> >> Following on this, I think beliefs are some kind of "static pattern of >> value" we all absorb. If you become (by whatever means) convinced of >> proposition A, then later someone tries to persuade you of proposition B, >> and B is opposed to A so that you can't logically believe both A and B at >> the same time, I think it will be harder to convince you of B than it would >> have been had you not previously been convinced of A. >> >> What you believe first has more value to you than what people try to >> convince you of later. > > Dan: > Exactly. Even after Robert Pirsig writes two books postulating that > rather than subjects and objects being primary to intellect, patterns > of value are primary, many, many people will not believe. You seem > convinced otherwise. Bo is, too. So's Platt. Marsha? I don't know. I > think she's starting to see the cracks in Bo's SOL. I guess most > people are so entrenched in the primacy of subject/object thinking > that they'll resort to ridiculous lengths to maintain the illusion. > > I am not being mean-spirited when I say Bo's SOM as Quality's > intellect doesn't make sense in the context of the MOQ. I am stating a > fact. And if others choose to believe in nonsense I can't stop them. > No one can. You say you want an example of some "thing" that's not a > subject or object yet you're convinced subjects and objects are all > there is. Do you see the problem? > >> Mary: >> Most - no - all human disagreement arises from differing fundamental >> beliefs. > > Dan: > Disagreements drive the evolution of intellect. > >> Mary: >> Beliefs are static and difficult to overcome - so be careful what you choose >> to convince your children of. > > Dan: > Children grow up. If we teach them well, they'll do good. We have to > trust in that... right? > > Thank you, > > Dan > 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 ___ 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
