[MD] Re Proposed solution to SOL/Intellectual level

[skutvik at online.no]

Joe and Khoo

23 Jan. Joe wrote:

Khoo earlier:
> > ³Buddhism, and if you must, an overarching Eastern worldview has less
> > deference for names and labels, categories and levels, categories and
> > levels. What is more important is the underlying insight that comes from
> > understanding and the perception of reality.²

Joe:
> Pirsig proposed DQ/SQ as reality.  William James sees a difference
> between ³percept² and ³concept².  To my way of thinking James
> suggested a foundation for the MOQ, DQ/SQ with ³percept² being
> undefined DQ and ³concept² being defined SQ.  

Right you are Joe. Pirsig - or the MOQ at least - postulates the 
DQ/SQ and there's nothing about language (names/labels) being part 
of the static side of this dualism. Then for some inexplicable reason 
(to me) Pirsig suddenly embraced William James and introduced' 
"concepts" as what breaks the dynamic unity.   

> Imho Khoo is seeing the written concepts SQ and wants to emphasize
> ³the perception of reality² DQ.  It is very difficult to have a
> written conversation using only words that are undefinable.

You bet. Language as the great divide is untenable. Besides, it 
arrived only with humans so there were aeons of static inorganic and 
biological existence before it. Afterwards it became the primary 
means of communication. 
 
> Singing and talking are different from writing in that singing follows
> a musical octave relationship, and talking employs gestures and facial
> expressions. A verbal conversation with word intonations and gestures
> and singing are more dynamic than reading written words.

Right, language is regarded as arriving in the social era, and as the 
social "expression" can be compressed into "emotions", language is 
often reinforced by gestures and facial expressions. Spot on.

Bodvar