Bo said:I just wonder what people see as its central "value" if taking > intellect down a peg means "smashing" the MOQ. I fear that the > answer is that intellect is their holy grail ...consciousness, MIND, > where everything resides, and DYNAMIC most of all. This is > somish to the core and what I have protested always. Intellect is > the highest static value, yet static with a limited capacity and as > blind to any movement above itself as the rest of the levels.
DM: Hi Bo, still trying to grasp what your position is.... Please tell me what you agree/disagree with below: Now SOM has a long and evolving history from Greeks via Descartes to modern materialism (i.e. SOM with a less and less visible subject). And it has produced a great deal of valuable knowledge up to the point where it now seems to be a metaphysics creating unnecessary limits and problems, despite still having some capacity to deliver more knowledge. Pirsig proposes we adopt a quality matephysics instead with a different SQ/DQ divide where we recognise the underlying union of the two in Quality. This different divide enables us to look at all those aspects of SQ that under SOM would fall into the subject and be ignored. It also enables us to open up a clear site where DQ is active in its pretty undefinable way, allowing us to recognise DQ and not think we can describe a total world of objects and nothing but material objects. Now this SQ/DQ devide has no effect on science/knowledge as Pirsig says, we just get a different conception of what we mean by causality and objects. So Bo where is the value of SO divide here, do we need it? I think it has had a great historic value and influence (up to here I think I agree with you) but is now superseded by MOQ. In the MOQ the subject-object distinction melts away, everything falls into our different level patterns inorganic, organic, social structures, structures within the individual, cultural structures, etc. As you can see I think we need more level complexity than Pirsig suggests but I do not think that is a big deal, just getting ontological levels going is the really important thing. Over to you Bo.....If you are going to tell me that I am washing away some great value in the SI divide, I don't see it. Tell me what I am losing, why I should be concerned. regards David M [Note from moderator- I've chopped off the automatic copying in of the previous post. Shout if you object! - Sam] MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_focus/ MF Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/mf/subscribe.html
