[MD] subject/object: pragmatism

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Platt.

On 18 Nov. you wrote:

> That's what I thought I said -- " . . . the 4th level is the VALUE of
> the S/O distinction" which forms the basis of SOM. (By contrast the
> MOQ stresses the value of the DQ/SQ distinction.) 

Right, but the MOQ is no static intellectual level. It is the very 
Dynamic/Static Metaphysics, the said meta-level from where the level 
context is seen. Intellect is as blind as the rest to that context.  

> I've also stressed the levels are NOT isolated mental compartments but
> dominating value regions that overlap at the edges -- or if you like, a
> hierarchy of changing values running morally upwards from rocks to
> reason. 

Good.

> I don't think SOM can be all of intellect 

Well if so we are back at start with a 4th. level that contains ideas, 
theories, metaphysics .. etc. in a SOM-mind sense. 

> because then you would have no place to put symbolic systems like
> mathematics and computer code. 

Where would you put the symbolic system like language used long 
before the intellectual level?  The hieroglyphs of the Egyptians and the 
cone (is that the name) signs of the Babylonians?. When it comes to 
mathematical and geometrical theorems they are as intellectual as 
intellect comes; proofs to show that this or that observed phenomenon 
is an objective eternal principle, why the hypotenuse always relates to 
the legs ... etc. But reckoning, calculating, in itself is logic or 
intelligence. Re. computer code it's a form of language in line with all 
languages means to communicate, convey social patterns at the social 
level and intellectual patterns at the intellectual level   

> By stating "I very much regard SOM all of intellect" you are placing
> intellect in a tight mental compartment which, as you say, transfers
> that idea into the MOQ which "screws it up."    

I'm not placing intellect anywhere near a tight mental compartment. 
The S/O-derived "mental/corporeal" is an intellectual pattern and 
intellect is a mere STATIC level within the MOQ. Can't you see the 
logical fault of a sub-set of a system containing the whole system? 
Pirsig ponted out the container metaphor, but then went on to violate it 
- by placing the MOQ as an intellectual pattern. 


Bo