[MD] Food for Thought

[Joseph Maurer]

On Tues 09 January 2007 12:29PM Laird writes to Ian, DMB, Arlo

Hi Laird, Ian, Arlo, DMB,

[Laird]

Glad to see so many others roping SOM (and its fruits) within intellect,
keen to its outgrowth from a strong S/O mythos. For a while I got the
feeling I was the only one working from this viewpoint.

"[S/O] is the predominant mode of the intellectual level, particularly
in greek-derived cultures, but not the only mode."

Cheers,
-Laird


Hi Laird, Ian, Arlo, DMB,

I am unsure, Laird, that I agree that "[S/O] is the predominant mode of the 
intellectual level, particularly in greek-derived cultures, but not the only 
mode." Modes of intellect seem to require a body/soul split. I can not 
envision modes of body on a sentient level. If a woman's body and a man's 
body are only modes of a body how is the identity or sense of self 
different? Are there only modes of laws for the social level?

I see rather a conscious evolution and a cosmic evolution underlying an S/O 
split. Although one sentient can experience both types of evolution, I don't 
agree it is a modal difference. Different values are involved. Mechanical 
values are static and subject to laws. Conscious values are not subject to 
the same laws.


IMO the intellect as a knife is a difficult analogy to understand. The 
intellect evolving from the social level as a law-giver, seems more fitting 
to the intellect's role, rather than as an independent butcher of all 
levels.

Joe

ian glendinning wrote:
> Hi DMB, Arlo,
>
> I agree with both of you there.
>
> The conclusion "that SOM is something like a particular species of 
> intellect."
> Is exactly my view too. Which just leaves us with that issue of
> agreeing the "distinguishing features" of intellect itself.
>
> But, "we murder to dissect, and starve upon the residue" if we're not
> careful with that analytic knife, eugene, etc. We need pragmatic use
> balanced against over zealous analysis. Agree entirely with your
> sentiments.
>
> Ian
>
> On 1/9/07, david buchanan <> wrote:
>
>> DMB said:
>> its seems obvious to me that SOM represents a flaw in the intellect and 
>> that
>> the repair job can only be done by intellect
>>
>> Arlo replied:
>> This I'm not so sure about. Can a non-S/O intellect rest atop an S/O 
>> mythos?
>> Although Pirsig didn't make the S/I distinction, per se, in ZMM, he seems 
>> to>> argue their that change has to begin with how people live their 
>> daily lives,
>> with everyday experience. Although, yes, if ZMM (or the MOQ) are
>> intellectual patterns, and they are attempting to reorder social patterns 
>> of
>> value, then it is, I suppose, an attempt by intellect to repair an S/O 
>> heavy
>> foundation. Hmm...
>>
>> dmb says:
>> I was also thinking about those passages where Pirsig talks about the way
>> intellect can slice up reality in all sorts of ways. I suppose its a 
>> little
>> too easy to butcher things if one is not careful, but basically I'm just
>> impressed with the notion that chopping things up into subjects and 
>> objects
>> is just one of many ways to slice it. That analytic knife can carve all
>> sorts of things and the only question is how well does it work. Likewise,
>> the map analogy says that the very same landscape can be represented in 
>> more
>> than one way. This sort of flexibility leads me to conclude that SOM is
>> something like a particular species of intellect.
>>




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Laird Bedore" <lmbedore at vectorstar.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Food for Thought


> Glad to see so many others roping SOM (and its fruits) within intellect,
> keen to its outgrowth from a strong S/O mythos. For a while I got the
> feeling I was the only one working from this viewpoint.
>
> "[S/O] is the predominant mode of the intellectual level, particularly
> in greek-derived cultures, but not the only mode."
>
> Cheers,
> -Laird
>
> ian glendinning wrote:
>> Hi DMB, Arlo,
>>
>> I agree with both of you there.
>>
>> The conclusion "that SOM is something like a particular species of 
>> intellect."
>> Is exactly my view too. Which just leaves us with that issue of
>> agreeing the "distinguishing features" of intellect itself.
>>
>> But, "we murder to dissect, and starve upon the residue" if we're not
>> careful with that analytic knife, eugene, etc. We need pragmatic use
>> balanced against over zealous analysis. Agree entirely with your
>> sentiments.
>>
>> Ian
>>
>> On 1/9/07, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> DMB said:
>>> its seems obvious to me that SOM represents a flaw in the intellect and 
>>> that
>>> the repair job can only be done by intellect
>>>
>>> Arlo replied:
>>> This I'm not so sure about. Can a non-S/O intellect rest atop an S/O 
>>> mythos?
>>> Although Pirsig didn't make the S/I distinction, per se, in ZMM, he 
>>> seems to
>>> argue their that change has to begin with how people live their daily 
>>> lives,
>>> with everyday experience. Although, yes, if ZMM (or the MOQ) are
>>> intellectual patterns, and they are attempting to reorder social 
>>> patterns of
>>> value, then it is, I suppose, an attempt by intellect to repair an S/O 
>>> heavy
>>> foundation. Hmm...
>>>
>>> dmb says:
>>> I was also thinking about those passages where Pirsig talks about the 
>>> way
>>> intellect can slice up reality in all sorts of ways. I suppose its a 
>>> little
>>> too easy to butcher things if one is not careful, but basically I'm just
>>> impressed with the notion that chopping things up into subjects and 
>>> objects
>>> is just one of many ways to slice it. That analytic knife can carve all
>>> sorts of things and the only question is how well does it work. 
>>> Likewise,
>>> the map analogy says that the very same landscape can be represented in 
>>> more
>>> than one way. This sort of flexibility leads me to conclude that SOM is
>>> something like a particular species of intellect.
>>>
>
> 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/
>