[Pirsig] The defect is that subject-object science has no provision for morals. ...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?"
[Marsha] Yes, science has the subject-object defect, as do all Intellectual static patterns of value... [Arlo] Can you explain why your ideas about Intellect=SOM are better than Pirsig's ideas that Intellect!=SOM? Do you think your ideas have better explanatory power? Offer the possibility for better solutions? What does your MOQ offer that Pirsig's does not? Ron: Arlo, I suspect that the reasons people subscribe to the intellect=SOM theory are emotional reasons. It fits in with their current ways of thinking, it is consistent with the values which they choose to define themselves. The anti intellectual hippie movement held these values. Bob outlines the consequences of this movement of mistaking biological quality for dynamic quality which is one of the great explanations of why it failed. That is why it is so important to clearly make the distinction between intellect= SOM theory with Pirsigs expansion of reason. The consequences, are vastly different. Which brings about something I've been contemplating regarding what Nietzsche said about philosophy being unable to cure an ailing culture. New thread perhaps? 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
