[MD] subject / object logic

[Joseph Maurer]

On Friday 10 August 2007 12:55:19 PM Ron writes:

[Ron]
I've been emersing myself in Bodvar's work on the SOL concept and
I have to say I'm with him. I believe as well as Ham, that how reality
is percieved is through Subject object perception. To percieve and
understand any part of reality is to percieve it as subject and object. Even our
sensual recognition is based in symbol comprehension.
we are emersed in languge but also much deeper than imagined, language
is an out growth of comprehension, language communicates this understanding. I believe Subject Object perception is base awareness for all living organisms, I believe instinct is built on it.
I used Mathmatics as a model for this phenomena citing the concept and
employment of the "limit" as a proof of sorts for this concept of subject object perception.

"The argument that the MOQ is not an intellectual formulation but some
kind of other level is not clear to me. There is nothing in the MOQ that
I know of that leads to this conclusion."
-Quote from Pirsig


Hi Ron and all,

IMO There are two ways of looking at evolution Cosmic evolution and Conscious evolution. The forces involved in cosmic evolution are perceived as objective. Conscious evolution is perceived as subjective. The motive for my actions flowing from cosmic evolution are mechanical, objective. The motive for my actions flowing from conscious evolution are conscious, subjective. It is very difficult to distinguish a difference between conscious and cosmic evolution, as one is more powerful than the other. It helps to realize that the cosmic influences recur every 311,000 years (144 signs). My actions recur mechanically by habit not cosmically influenced. I can behave differently. For me Conscious evolution has only had 75 years to develop so far. There is a difference. IMO Cosmic influences on me are mechanical until I reach the conscious level of proprietary awareness (social). I develop habits and do not see the difference between cosmic influenced intellect
 (law-giver e.g. gravity, objective) and conscious influenced intellect (social law-giver e.g. marriage, subjective) which can develop further into enlightenment (higher social and higher intellectual) solely subjective levels. 

When I suggested to Bo that subjective and objective were based on conscious and cosmic evolution he told me to keep thinking.

Joe



I've been emersing myself in Bodvar's work on the SOL concept and
I have to say I'm with him. I believe as well as Ham, that how reality
is percieved is through Subject object perception. To percieve and
understand
any part of reality is to percieve it as subject and object. Even our
sensual recognition is based in symbol comprehension.
we are emersed in languge but also much deeper than imagined, language
is an out growth
of comprehension, language communicates this understanding.  I believe
Subject
Object perception is base awareness for all living organisms,I believe
instinct is built on it.

I used Mathmatics as a model for this phenomena citing the concept and
employment of the "limit"
as a proof of sorts for this concept of subject object perception.

"The argument that the MOQ is not an intellectual formulation but some
kind of other level is not clear to me. There is nothing in the MOQ that
I know of that leads to this conclusion."
-Quote from Pirsig

I think Bo means that MOQ is an intellectual awareness of SO perception.

The intellection of taking into account of how we understand
the universe. The paradox being we can't see the forrest through the
trees. Not just a greek
convention but a human condition, something the philosophies of the east
are well aquainted with.
It is the reason why the intellectual level can be interpreted to begin
with the organic level.
Here is where we suffer a language problem with how to classify and what
to call this awareness
of s/o perception. Bo then brings up the question shouldn't there be
another category within the 
intellectual level perhaps a subject object intellectual and a Quality
intellectual (for lack of 
any proper descriptive term) a transcendent intellectual level one in
which the awareness of the
subject object perception is taken into account when intellectualizing. 

I suspect the problem with grasping this concept is the fact that there
is no suitable 
conventional terminology for it so it kinda just enimatically floats
with terms like mysticism
and enlightenment for the lack of any deacent western terminology, so it
is not taken seriously.
how does one term an intellection which trancends common awareness of
perception without
sounding like a mystic? the problem is using a distinctive language
created from subject -object
experience to describe an infinite reality. this paradox happens because
anything outside this limited
perception is infinite and meaningless.

MOQ just may be a dynamic awareness freeing itself from a static
intellection of Subject object perception
and in that way Bo may be onto something.

-Ron







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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/