[MD] Re-inventing the wheel.

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi David M.

First of all thanks for your kind word about my "religion" piece. 
"Sophisticated" ...I hope so. I seem to remember that you spoke 
of clergies in the UK who has expressed doubt in "God". I still 
think this is a favorable development, our recent encounter with 
Islam has opened some eyes I hope. OK enough.           

29 Jan. you wrote:

> I have a question. If we see the 4th level as about the
> emergence of the S/O divide,

Yes, if ..... if Pirsig had made SOM of ZMM the intellectual level 
of the MOQ it would have been unassailable. As it is ... phew, 
most participants now shy away from the static levels - 
particularly intellect - and chat about DQ in a New-Age way. 

> how do we see the social 
> level? Is the social level about human common life

This is correct enough, but sounds so innocent. All levels' primary 
purpose is to control its parent level, thus social morality is most 
clearly seen in the Semitic religions (must make this distinction 
as you know) commandments, laws, rules and regulation about 
everything from food and drink to dress codes and sex. All for the 
purpose of bringing biology under control. This is all well where 
the social level is highest good, but where intellect has arisen IT 
has started its own control of social values, and Pirsig says that 
all conflicts stem from the social/intellectual struggle  - not least 
the Islam/West one.      

> before the S/O divide so that it is about religion and myth and social
> authority 

Yes, but we must not make the social value all ancient and/or 
bad, it's still around as part of our make-up. Another thing, it's 
only from intellect that social value looks like evil, we are 
supposed to see things from the meta-level of the MOQ where 
the level context is revealed.    

> prior to the emergence of S/O divide dependent forms such as 
> individuals, intellectuals, etc?

Right, but "individ" in the individualism sense (freedom from 
social constraints) ancient times surely knew the individual by 
name and social position. ) And "intellectuals" but not merely 
learned people and/or bureaucrats - ancient times had lots of 
such too - but scientists, academics etc.     

IMO

Bo