[MD] The Edge 2006 Annual Question

[skutvik at online.no]

Mike and Masses.

I may lag behind I see from today's posts that Ian believes my 
SOL to be (the 4th level seen as) "objectivism", while it really is 
S/O-ism!!!!!!

Anyway over to your "follow ups" where I start with the first one.

> > > The wide sense in which I used "objectivity" in the last couple of
> > > posts seems like a synonym for "truth", so perhaps to keep the
> > > usefulness of the word "objective" I should go back to using it in
> > > the mere Cartesian sense of "objects", which the 4th level CAN
> > > move beyond, as opposed to the wide sense of "true for everyone,
> > > everywhere, for all time", which the 4th level can NOT move
> > > beyond. However, keeping in mind the wider sense will help greatly
> > > in understanding what Bo is banging on about.

I understand your pointing this out, yet if the 4th level is the S/O 
dualism it's committed to them all. The "subject" and "object" 
terms are of course rather recent (does anyone know?) the 300 
BC Greeks did definitely not know them, but Pirsig used it (in 
ZMM) as the common denominator for the new "quality-less" 
reality that took over from the old quality-filled one.                 

Your second:

> > Intellectual (4th-level) acceptance of the MOQ, is the realisation
> > that SOM does NOT work for everyone, everywhere, for all time. It is
> > an acceptance that the SQ/DQ metaphysics CAN work for everyone,
> > everywhere, for all time. 

The MOQ says that all levels began when a pattern of the former  
"took off on a purpose of its own". The MOQ is no level yet 
displays level-like traits vs the 4th level, which means that some 
intellectual (S/O) pattern was used to establish the MOQ. Looking 
back on ZMM it's evident that the argument circles around 
science; Einstein, Poincaré, Euclid, and it is also clear that 
physics is the reason that many wrongly believe Pirsig to be a 
NewAger. My warning here is that this merely leads to 
subjectivism and I have repeatedly pointed to the fact that the 
subjective "horn" was rejected too.       

> > As the DQ component cannot be defined,
> > intellectual acceptance of the MOQ is an acceptance that the
> > metaphysics which can work for everyone, everywhere, for all time,
> > CANNOT be intellectually defined. Therefore, intellectual acceptance
> > of the MOQ paves the way for moving beyond intellect (beyond the 4th
> > level) because it is an acceptance that reality cannot be
> > intellectually defined.
> > Making any sense?

Yes lots of sense, but IMO it's not merely DQ, but the complete 
DQ/SQ configuration which reveals MOQ's supremacy over its 
own 4th level  ...while this level posed as SOM. 

"Intellectual acceptance of the MOQ" is a bit ambiguous. It 
sounds as if MOQ has made into the 4th level and lodges there, 
but ....well, MOQ surely pried its way into intellect, but it just went 
through and intellect never knew what hit it; One moment S/O 
Metaphysics, the next part of another metaphysics. 

Your final input:

> In other words, the MOQ is where the 4th level admits its own
> inadequacy, and even creates a structure of thought to demonstrate its
> own inadequacy - in the same way as society admitted its own
> inadequacy by relaxing its powers of coercion to allow individual
> liberty - which we now can recognise was done in the service of DQ.

This one I commented indirectly in yesterday's post to Scott. 
Anyway great stuff Mike. 

Bo