[MD] -elitist ideas

[skutvik at online.no]

Arlo and all involved in this thread

17 Mar. you wrote to Case who had said:

[Case]
> > I think I side with Platt and Kevin on this one. You can refine your
> > understanding of the interaction of rocks in such a way as to use the
> > term experience.

> [Arlo]
> I think I am refining my understanding to what Pirsig was saying. You
> may disagree, of course, but I don't think I am out-of-bounds
> regarding the MOQ. Indeed, I'd say I am the one "in bounds". To define
> "experience" to exclude inorganic patterns goes against the
> fundamental principle of "value" underlying all levels. If inorganic
> patterns do not "experience" inorganic value, then why do they respond
> the way they do? 

I have noticed your earlier posts and have agreed more and 
more. You are definitely the one inside the MOQ, but don't YOU - 
by the MOQ insight you obviously possess - see that these 
problems (of experience=consciousness and the quantum 
quandaries) occurs because of the reigning intellectual level? 

> Saying "value" or "experience" only emerges at the bio-social levels
> denies, in my opinion, the claim that Quality is the Source. This is
> just what I had posted to Kevin. Value *must* exist at the inorganic
> level, and as such inorganic patterns *must* experience said value.
> Otherwise Quality itself does not exist until we hit the more advanced
> levels of bio-social patterns.
 
> And then we are right back to SOM. Objects that do not experience
> Quality, and Subjects that do. Quality, then, is a subjective
> experience against an external value-less world.
 
> You and Kevin and Platt can embrace that position, but I don't think
> it reflects the MOQ, I think it is straightforward SOM.

Agree unto tears. You will remember that I define the 4th. level 
as the S/O distinction and because all seem stuck there 
(regrettably with Pirsig's blessings because he says that the MOQ 
is an intellectual pattern) we necessarily end up with intellect's 
outlook of ourselves as subjects aware of the objective world. In 
which view the levels below intellect becomes the scientific 
disciplines of sociology, biology and physics, and that organisms 
and particles (for instance) must be conscious (in a S/O sense) to 
perceive value. Because intellect is a static (incomplete) level we 
get a MOQ loaded to the plimsoll mark with the very weaknesses 
that its taking leave of SOM was meant to repair.

This "miscarried" 4th level will continue to haunt the MOQ until it 
returns to the original ZMM stage where "intellect=S/O) and from 
there goes on with the known levels only with a revised intellect. 
As it is we will have Magnuses and Cases of all sorts who have 
easy play because the current faulty intellect. Pirsig spent much 
time pointing out that inorganic VALUE has nothing to do with 
SOM's "substance", but did not emphasize enough that 
intellectual VALUE has as little to do with SOM's "mind" and the 
mind-definition rules. 

A few insightful persons like yourself see the error when it pops 
up, but shy away from the basic revision (you broke of our 
discussion some time ago) that I have been banging on about for 
years.  

Bo.