Hey all,
Horse has lead me to action....
RICK:
I thought discussions like this one, where we explore, test, and probe
the MoQ is what this forum was for. How can we ever help to expand or
complete this initial outline if everyone just defends it? With the
exception of 3WDave's comments on Ken Wilbur, not
one person (as of the writing of this post) has actually suggested a
remedy
to the problem.... just different ways of sweeping it under the rug.
HORSE:
So what's your suggestion? I'm just answering your initial question(s)
as a preliminary to further discussion.
RICK:
Well, I have been doing some thinking lately. Pirsig tells us that LILA
was designed from a system of cards on which he collected, organized
and
refined his thoughts. I believe we can safely assume that the bulk of
the MoQ was developed on these cards. It occured to me that at some
point in
this development there must have been topic cards with headings that
read INORGANIC, BIOLOGICAL, SOCIOLOGICAL, INTELLECTUAL and some with
GENERAL
THOUGHTS on the levels. Logically speaking, if we work backwards from
the material in LILA there's no reason we shouldn't be able to
reasonably "reconstruct" these categories.
All we do is post some initial "cards" and add to them each time we
find something new... Each one is just a sentance or two with a page
number credited, we could use LILA and the SODV paper as sources and
group the quotes by their relevance to one of the respective levels. The
final results could linked off of the MoQ.Org site for all to see.
There is no danger of "dogmatizing" the MoQ because no interpretation
will be necessary, all the quotes will be direct and cited; And since
the book LILA won't ever change we can always use this a fixed resource.
Furthermore, we wouldn't be treating LILA like a bible, since the point
of this would be to help expand and complete the theory not set it in
stone.
By doing this we can get a firm grip on Pirsig's vision of the
levels and their contents. Which could take us a great deal closer to
solving this month's problem. What does Pirsig actually tell us about
how the patterns fit into the levels? Are "multiple-level"
interpretations like Magnus's consistent with Pirsig's MoQ? WHat about
the Ken Wilbur stuff--- does it really match Pirsig as well as 3WDave
claims?
Most importantly, this gives us a base from which we can compare and
contrast our own ideas about the levels.... It can only help us in
exploring this month's topic and topics to come.
What do you think?
Trying to be productive,
Rick
--- End of forwarded message -------
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
