[MD] Knowledge as MOQ's intellect

[ian glendinning]

Hi Steve, I prefer to see it as ...

A pattern, of patterns, of patterns, of .... of value.
(which is ultimately just another "pattern" so I think I'd agree.)

Ian

On 12/14/07, Steve Peterson <stevenkpeterson at mac.com> wrote:
> Hi Bo,
>
> You said to Spirit and Ian:
> > I can't for the life of me figure
> > out what a level is besides its value
>
> Steve:
> It's becoming more and more clear to me that you really don't know
> what a level is. I'd be happy to help if you think I could be of
> assistance.
>
> The levels refer to types of static patterns of value. You seem to
> always refer to a level as "the value of X" as in "the value of the S/
> O divide" or as in this case a level having a value. Nowhere does
> Pirsig describe a level as a single value. He always uses them as
> parts of a classification system for types of patterns.
>
> Pirsig:
> "In this plain of understanding static patterns of value are divided
> into
> four systems: inorganic patterns, biological patterns, social
> patterns and
> intellectual patterns.  They are exhaustive.  That's all there are.
> If you
> construct an encyclopedia of four topics-Inorganic, Biological,
> Social and
> Intellectual-nothing is left out.  No "thing," that is.  Only Dynamic
> Quality, which cannot be described in any encyclopedia, is absent."
>
>
> Bo:
> > Yet, the MOQ is no static level it just reveals
> > the Quality context.
>
> No, the MOQ is not a level, it is a pattern of value.
>
> Regards,
> Steve
> 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/
>