[MD] The Bridge Over Paradox

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting Heather Perella <spiritualadirondack at yahoo.com>:

>       [Platt]
> > Yes, good of you to point it out. When I say "I
> > think " I am using the verbiage of
> > SOM which, as has been noted by Hofstader and
> > others, inevitably leads to recursive
> > loops --- as your questions so vividly illustrate! 
> > It is my habit, and perhaps that of others, to say
> > "I think" when actually I was
> > reporting a Dynamic understanding as in the MOQ, not
> > a logical conclusion as in SOM.
> 
> 
>      "understanding" and "reporting" as in "reporting
> a Dynamic understanding" that's what the mind does,
> right?  The mind understands and reports.  Still stuck
> in SOM you and Bo may say.  I wonder how you and Bo
> view the world with a S/O intellect, oh, probably with
> a S/O view.
> 
> thanks, but not getting this 'out of this intellect'
> thinking, yet, still 'out of the mind' but 'part of
> the mind' yet, not the mind, etc, etc.

Perhaps you are thinking of mind as Pirsig described it, "a collection
and manipulation of symbols." But, as Arlo pointed out, every symbolic
system ends up in self-defeating paradoxes, recursions,loops, etc. The essence
of the MOQ is prior to and above the symbolic system -- pure experience
prior to symbolic intellection of any kind. Thus, it's the bridge over paradox.  

>     I would suggest just have MoQ intellectual
> thoughts in the mind, and with more practice the S/O
> intellect will not be the habit of how you perceive
> the world (perceive is of the mind; the intellect). 

Perception is a non-intellectual, non-symbolic aspect of mind as are instinct,
intuition and insight -- all inextricably connected to valuation. 

> Either I've changed the view of these levels to
> incorporate a static quality view, or you and Bo are
> not changing these levels into static quality levels
> and want to hold onto SOM, or maybe something else is
> going on.  I've leave that latter as a true
> possibility.

SOM comes in mighty handy in dealing with the practical everyday world of
survival. But, if the question is how do we know the SOM has quality,
the answer can only come from someplace other than itself. For example,
science can't explain why it's good using scientific methods. 


 

-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/