I wasn't trying to take over the thread, but merely present my relating interpretation of Bo's position. - Marsha
On Aug 1, 2010, at 6:43 AM, MarshaV wrote: > > For me, the definition of a level is a reflection of how the patterns > within it function. I understand both the social level and the intellectual > level being 'subjective' because both levels of patterns are based on > their processing being the action of a 'self' on an external world. The > inorganic and biological levels are based on 'external' objects in > Nature. > > Within the Social level a subject/object reality is the underlying > but unacknowledged assumption; its focus being on social intercourse. > > Patterns within the Intellectual Level have a _formalized_, built-in > SOM point-of-view. The bases within intellectual patterns are > that the 'subjective' is supposedly stripped from the events to > reveal 'truth' about the objects in the 'external' world. The objects > of this SOM, external world are reified concepts and the rules > for their rational analysis and manipulation. > > > > > > > > On Aug 1, 2010, at 6:03 AM, MarshaV wrote: > >> >> >> Hi Dave, >> >> I think you, or I, have misunderstood Bo's position, because I think >> he has clearly been stating that the Intellectual Level has at its basis >> the Metaphysical assumption that reality consists of Subject and >> Objects (SOM). >> >> >> Marsha >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Aug 1, 2010, at 12:34 AM, David Thomas wrote: >> >>> All, >>> >>> Since early in the Lila Squad days it was clear that Bo was skeptical of >>> Pirsig's further development of the Quality idea in Lila. He sensed there >>> was something wrong with the MoQ picture. When the S.O.D.V paper was >>> published he came to a full rolling boil and has not turned off the heat >>> since. It is becoming more and more clear to me he was and is right. But not >>> in the way that he (or for that matter many others) will be happy with. In >>> addition as I watch the ongoing conversations here, except for a few of the >>> MoQ priests, most if not all have some similar concerns. >>> >>> For instance of those who see value in Pirsig's work none would seem further >>> apart than Bo and Krimel. Recently Krimel posted: >>> >>>> [Krimel in Bo's weak versus strong interpretation of quantum physiks >>>> thread] >>>> For about the umpteenth time I regard Pirsig's work especially in ZMM as a >>>> western explication of Taoism and as such very useful and valuable. When it >>>> strays from that track it becomes, er, uh, less valuable. >>> >>> I doubt Bo would strongly disagree with this statement and he may not >>> disagree at all. How strange is that? Actually not very. If sales, reviews, >>> and commentaries are any indication, ZMM is thousands of times better liked >>> and grocked than Lila. More people find it of higher quality. Years ago I >>> e-mailed a couple members of the "named intelligentsia" Richard Rorty and >>> Christopher Alexander about whether they had read Lila and what they thought >>> of it. Though both read and thought ZaMM was great neither wouldn't comment >>> on Lila. One hadn't read it and the other had started, but never finished. >>> Why not? My guess is they he smelled something, a whiff of core wrongness. >>> Krimel calls it brittleness. Many think limiting the social level to humans >>> is wrong. Magnus, forever, has argued for more levels. And few if any are >>> entirely comfortable with the intellect and the intellectual level. The >>> claim of level discreteness and domination has been questioned. >>> >>> For those who need refreshing what set Bo boiling is Figure 4 >>> (http://www.moq.org/forum/Pirsig/emmpaper.html) in Pirsig's "Subjects, >>> Objects, Data, and Value" paper is on the MoQ website. The diagram shows the >>> standard four MoQ levels grouped in two groups of two the upper two >>> (social/intellectual) labeled subjective the lower two >>> (inorganic/biological) labeled objective. DQ is above the levels diagram >>> with arrows point out and around the levels. At first blush this diagram >>> seems to indicate that subjectivism >>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjectivism) dominates the system. RMP tries >>> to explain this away in the text. >>> >>> Bo's is adamant that SODV diagram is wrong. The intellect (and therefore the >>> intellectual level) is the domination of objective reason, logic, over >>> subjective emotions or feelings. If we translate the SODV diagram as Bo >>> wishes the intellectual level turns objective and the others stay the same. >>> The only subjective level is the social level. Compare this the original >>> SODV diagram and ask yourself, "What practical difference is there between >>> these two views?" >>> >>> Is there any real difference between "intellectual quality" or "objective >>> intellectual quality" having the moral imperative to dominant the lower >>> levels? >>> >>> In both is not the social level still the bastion of traditional values, >>> myths, intuition, feelings, and unwarranted, subjective, actions and >>> conclusions? >>> >>> Are not the inorganic and biological realms still pursued by science as much >>> as is possible objectively? >>> >>> From my POV these two visions of static levels are for all practical >>> purposes identical. Yes, yes I understand Bo shifts the MoQ out to the >>> meta-meta ether, but that is basically a problem of the levels or more >>> importantly the entire system's order, rules, and definitions. So the >>> problem that Bo's thinks he has found is not really "The Problem." We will >>> have to look further. >>> >>> (To be continued.......bear with me I think slowly and type even slower) >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 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 > > > > ___ > > > 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
