[MD] The Quality/MOQ meta-metaphysics

[MarshaV]

Andre,  


I think Craig's suggestion won't work because you flat out 
state: "I really think that Bodvar means something completely 
different..."  You are overlaying your patterns onto whatever 
Bo tries to explain.  Your posts are a mirror of your own 
confusion.  


Marsha 





On Jun 23, 2010, at 6:37 AM, Andre Broersen wrote:

> Bodvar to Craig, Ham, All:
> 
> Craig had suggested:
> 
> Pirsig emphasizes
>> >  static patterns of value.  Bo identifies the intellectual level with
>> >  Subjects&  Objects.  But what if Subjects&  Objects are seen as
>> >  static patterns of value?  Doesn't this bridge the gap between the 2
>> >  metaphysics?
> 
> Yes, yes, the SOL is all about it making the S/O a static value, it
> bridges gaps and reconciles differences galore. SOM stripped of its
> metaphysical rank - made into MOQ's highest static level - is the
> panacea that gives MOQ's its phenomenal explanatory power
> Thanks Craig, this is most promising and don't let the Great Inquisition
> stop you from promulgating this idea.
> 
> Andre:
> Craig, within the MOQ, subjects are social and intellectual patterns of value. Objects are inorganic and organic patterns of value. I really doubt if Bodvar's use of these two symbols designating these two levels coincide/comprise (with) his intellectual level. It cannot make sense.
> Bodvar keeps on talking about the value of his S/O distinction as being the objective over the subjective...a 'detached' distinction between the two. How this is going to rhyme with your suggestion (and Bodvar's encouragement thereof) well, I will not hold my breath but am interested to hear Bodvar's further explanation.
> 
> I anticipate a decade-long exposition of the difference between the intellectual level and intellect, an equally long exposition about subject/object, subjective/objective, Bodvar's understanding of SOM and what the MOQ means by SOM, the necessity of a fifth level or not, and last but not least whether a metaphysics can be equated with Reality, Quality, the Tao, experience etc. etc.
> 
> You see, the first sentence of Bodvar's second paragraph '...the SOL is all about it making the S/O a static value IS exactly what the MOQ does. Objects are static inorganic- and organic patterns of value, subjects are static social- and intellectual patterns of value fused/blended into an organic, evolutionary whole.
> 
> I really think that Bodvar means something completely different... I mean, he rejects three-quarters of the MOQ and calls most of Mr. Pirsig's arguments and explanations "nonsense'. (see, for yet another instance of this, his post to me above).
> 
> I am afraid your suggestion won't change a thing. It will only encourage Bodvar to think that the percolating goes up instead of disappearing underground...which IS what a percolating machine does you know!(not sure if Bodvar ever got this).
> 
> 
> 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


 
___