Craig and Arlo 3 May:
[Craig] > I would say the one example is the MoQ. 1) The MoQ is/is- part- of the > Intellectual Level 2) The MoQ isn't/isn't-part-of the SOM 3) :. SOM > isn't the Intellectual Level. Bodvar: At the time P of ZAMM struggled to get his teacher colleagues to understand the Quality Idea it certainly was an intellectual pattern in SOM's "intellect=the realm of ideas" sense, he went most objectively about the job, but from the moment of the full-fledged MOQ - when "intellect" became a subset of its a subset of the MOQ - it's impossible for the MOQ to be contained therein without violating logic .... unless it returns to its status as SOM's mind (realms of ideas) something I suspect it has for you. [Arlo] > Yeah. I think a source of confusion here is to think that because > intellectual patterns are built with symbols, and symbols are > predominantly linguistic, and language makes us of "subject" and > "object" grammatically, then one misconstrues all that as SOM. No Arlo I can assure you that this is not behind the SOL (Intellect = S/O) interpretation. It will carry it too far to go through it all, but you know how ZAMM describes the emergence of SOM, that Socrates is its midwife. In that book Pirsig says that Socrates represented INTELLECT'S LIBERATION FROM ITS SOCIAL ORIGIN. Ergo he saw SOM = intellect. That is just one indication. Lila contains many more. > But language also makes use of verbs and time. It would be as easy to > characterize intellect as Motion-Time Metaphysics, that being the > case. ??????????? > In any case, the distinction is that SOM is a unique subset of > intellectual patterns that begins with the premise that a > "subject-object" divide is the PRIMARY metaphysical split, and then > any subsequent "reasoning" from that premise we'd label "SOM". Is this a convoluted affirmation of the SOL or is it a rejection??? Anyway all intellectual patterns are based on the premises that the S/O schism is reality's fundament. > This is precisely what led Pirsig to ask: Now that intellect was in > command of society for the first time in history, was this the > intellectual pattern it was going to run society with? (LILA) Right, how can the 4th. level have managed to rise on top of the 3rd. and - as is a MOQ tenet - regard society as "evil" in any other capacity than SOM? The "attitude" that by objective reasoning showed that social morals were merely subjective mind-patterns, not having root in reality? . 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
