[MD] Platt's Individual Level

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

>From: Steve Peterson <vincentedisonluther at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>Subject: Re: [MD] Platt's Individual Level
>Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 08:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>Steve:
>The issue at hand is not whether or not the individual
>really exists. There is no question about whether th
>eindividual is a useful concept in everyday life as
>well as in philosophy.

Hi Steve

And there is no question that the intellectual level is a useful concept in 
the MOQ. This seems to be just word play though; if not, please clarify your 
point.

>
>The question is whether it makes sense to think that
>what Pirsig really meant by the individual level is
>the intellectual level.

But that answer's quite obvious, isn't it? Platt has been making sense of it 
all along. Perhaps it all depends on what the context and definition of "it" 
is...

>The quotes I posted suggest
>that for Pirsig the individual is not the central idea
>of his metaphysics since doing so would be
>inconsistent with his Buddhist affinity.

In the language of everyday life, the MOQ begins with experience. Who is 
"it" that experiences?

>
>Can you provide any support for saying that it
>actually is useful or clarifying or at all accurate to
>say that the intellectual level is the same as Platt's
>individual level?

I can provide support that the MOQ says that the individual is composed of 
all four levels plus undefined Dynamic Quality. In the context of the Rahula 
quote offered by Ant, however, the concept of the intellectual level and the 
concept of the individual (as is anything conceptualized) are just useful 
conventions. In that context, the language of everyday life, useful 
conventions are those that work. If it doesn't work, don't use it. Would you 
agree?

>I've been trying to make the point
>that Platt is saying something very different than
>Pirsig with his Philosophy of the Individual versus
>Society.

What Robert Pirsig and Platt are saying is not mutually exclusive. But that 
wasn't my point. You already know what the intellectual level is. Why bicker 
over petty generalities? The MOQ offers much grander vistas.

See for yourself.

Dan