[MD] The Quality/MOQ meta-metaphysics

[X Acto]

Marsha:
I believe in an emerging quality level where value is known as primary,
and fourth-level, intellectual patterns are used for creating and implementing
a higher quality experience/environment.  Someday we'll find it, the rainbow
connection, the lovers, the dreamers and me.  

Ron:
How are intellectual patterns used for creating and implementing a higher quality
experience/environment given what you state below?

Marsha skillfully evades the question:
Before I answer you question, answer these which have been unanswered 
for  a long time:

As far as I know intellectual patterns are as I stated above, and I have seen
no evidence to the contrary.  Have you presented an intellectual pattern that
transcends a subject/object representation of reality, excluding art which may
use intellectual patterns but also makes use of inorganic, biological and social
patterns and often goes beyond.  Where is your evidence?  Let's see you
EXPLAIN and DEMONSTRATE an intellectual pattern that does not reify 
concepts, that does  not create a self involved in analyzing such concepts, 
or does not represent the rules for such manipulation?  You cannot do it, 
because the minute you've begun you have divided and formed an object 
and an analyzing self.  

Ron:
I think that the ability to understand and explain without contradiction
every last bit of Pirsigs work speaks more convincingly than a position
that does not have that ability. I am asking for an explanation not evidence.

I put to you

explain and demonstrate an intellectual pattern that does reify concepts.
That creates a self involved in analyzing such concepts.




Good Night






On Jun 29, 2010, at 9:20 PM, X Acto wrote:

> Platt., Marsha,
> How would you say SOL provides greater explanatory power?
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: MarshaV <valkyr at att.net>
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Sent: Tue, June 29, 2010 12:27:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [MD] The Quality/MOQ meta-metaphysics
> 
> 
> Right Platt!
> 
> Whose being dishonest by ignoring what?  This is exactly why I wouldn't want to be an intellectual.  Look as what you must do to maintain such an image of yourself.  Who is fooling who?  
> 
> 
> 
> Marsha 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jun 29, 2010, at 12:14 PM, Platt Holden wrote:
> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "david buchanan" <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com>
>> To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 11:21 AM
>> Subject: Re: [MD] The Quality/MOQ meta-metaphysics
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>> I think things get heated because it is so frustrating to witness the dismissal of this kind of evidence. The meaning is so explicit and so clear that there is just no way a reasonable person could reject it. And so you get accusations of stupidity and intellectual dishonesty as a reaction to that rejection. Anybody can make a mistake and we all have lots to learn but when these explanations have to be repeated over and over and over again - for years in some cases - people run out of patience. They get frustrated. That's just a natural reaction and the insulting conclusions reached about this stubbornness is not crazy, you know? Sadly, it's probably true. There might be other things going on too, but dishonesty and ignorance really would explain this persistent pattern of behavior. If anyone has a better explanation, I'd like to hear
>> 
>> [Platt]
>> Apply DMB's tirade to dismissal of the following evidence.
>> 
>> "What had happened since the end of World War I was that the INTELLECTUAL LEVEL had entered the picture and had taken over EVERYTHING. It was this INTELLECTUAL LEVEL level that was screwing everything up." (Lila, 24 - caps added)
>> 
>> 



___


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