[MD] What's missing

[skutvik at online.no]

Magnus and the tiny group still concerned with the MOQ. 

21 Mar. you wrote:

[Me earlier]:
> > intellectual aspect of Jesus teachings only came to the fore after
> > the Reformation and Enlightenment so Christendom before this
> > watershed were just as social-tied and backward. In your definition
> > of the intellectual level this does not make sense, but the MOQ view
> > leaves you and the SOM in the dust.  

[Magnus]:
> I guess this will surprise you, but it *does* make sense. I
> understand, and I also agree with, much of your view about the
> intellectual level and how it sprung out of the human social level.

So far so good ;-).

> What I don't agree with is your claim that the *only* paradigm that
> fits in the 4th level is the S/O paradigm. I refuse to believe that
> the MoQ is the first world view that doesn't use the S/O division as
> the primary one, and isn't that what you're claiming?

First, I insist on the MOQ view/intellect view distinction, without it 
one can't make heads or tails of anything.
 
Then in a MOQ view all non-intellect "world views" are non-S/O 
(it's superfluous to say that only the social level produced such) 
so in that sense you are right, the MOQ is not the first non-S/O 
system. However, it is no return to THIS kind of non-S/O as you 
know.

> I also don't agree that this is the *only* manifestation of the
> intellectual level atop social patterns. If you broaden the definition
> of the social level, it's possible to see other manifestations of
> intellectual levels. 

There really exists no definition of any level other than their 
purpose of freeing existence from the restraints of the former 
level. And I'm afraid this is where you go astray, instead of 
accepting MOQ's view, you look at the MOQ from intellect's S/O 
point of view, from where you see nothing BUT societies when in 
the "socio-" mood. And applying the "intellect out of society" 
tenet, all kinds of intellects emerge: an inorganic intellect, a 
biological intellect, a social intellect ...etc.      

> For some reason, you claim that this leads to
> SOM's mind, but I fail to see the connection. SOM's mind is the S part
> of the S/O division

If accepting the intellect=S/O, then from inside that level you get 
an objective world that an "intellect" observes and systematizes 
and if THIS intellect is carried over into the MOQ one gets the 
mind-definition of the 4th. level. Isn't that clear as day? And if so 
the MOQ is lost, instead of intellect being a sub-set of the MOQ, 
the  MOQ becomes an intellectual pattern. With Pirsig's blessing, 
why he did this to the MOQ is a mystery, but by now he seems 
unable to understand - much less - correct it.

> But the "mind" you get with intellectual patterns
> in a brain is still based on the MoQ divisions (first DQ/SQ, and then
> SQ -> 4-levels). Perhaps you could elaborate on that one?

Well, it's this SOM/MOQ hootch-potch that makes things difficult. 
You talk about the MOQ, but mix in a  4th level as if its patterns 
are located in the brain (mind from matter). As we once agreed 
on the complicated neural systems called brain made it possible 
to to anticipate different futures (can't go in details again). This 
biological INTELLIGENCE made the social level possible, but 
from then on Q-evolution was no longer biological but social. 
Then the 4th. level sprang from the 3rd. and now the 
aforementioned INTELLIGENCE that had served biological 
purposes and then social purposes, began to serve intellect's 
purposes (it has in fact started to serve Quality's purposes) 

But - and here is the clue - intellect (SOM seen from the MOQ) 
knows no Q-levels - only mind/matter - and looks into the brain to 
find the origins of what IT calls intellect (or thoughts or mind). As 
science this is the correct way, but as metaphysics its useless. 

Any clearer?

Bo