[MD] The intellectual level - once more

[David M]

Bo

I'd suggest the MOQ intellectually overcomes SOM
by proposing that we describe experience in terms of static
(repeating recurring) quality patterns and dynamic (emerging/
unrepeated) quality. Does this proposal not dismiss your
suggestion? Seems that simple to me.

Regards
David M


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <skutvik at online.no>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 4:06 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] The intellectual level - once more


> Hi DMB and absolutely all MOQists!
> 
> On 18 Nov. you said (to me):
> 
>> You think Pirsig's letter to Paul was "a masterpiece of evasion"? I
>> think that's ironic and that you are unreasonable on this topic. 
> 
> I a writing frenzy I found this "old" post of yours, possibly not 
> meant to be replied but I can't let go this topic. As you will 
> remember the letter answered Paul's inquiry about the infamous 
> 4th level. This is the most evasive part.
> 
>     But if one studies the early books of the Bible or if one 
>    studies the sayings of primitive tribes today, the 
>    intellectual level is conspicuously absent. The world is 
>    ruled by Gods who follow social and biological patterns 
>    and nothing else.  
> 
> Wish I were ironic and unreasonable, but it's just sadly true. If 
> Pirsigs sees the intellectual level as absent he does know what 
> the intellectual level is. Doesn't he ? What is missing is SOM, 
> that is plain as day and I thought I finally had the intellect issue 
> cornered and wrote to inquire and got this reply.   
> 
>    "I suspect you want to hear that what is "conspicuously 
>    absent" is SOM, but I am not sure that SOM was absent 
>    in early Biblical times since early social statements such 
>    as "Beware of the crocodile!" or "Javeh will reward you", 
>    are SOM but are not intellectual in the MOQ sense.    
> 
> He clearly saw the trap, but couldn't admit the obvious. The 
> crocodile warning as SOM is bad enough from the author of 
> ZAMM who wrote so splendidly and convincingly about SOM, but 
> then he makes the same strange exercise; He seemingly knows 
> what "intellectual in the MOQ sense" is, so why not tell us? It's 
> absolutely maddening. Well, I know I'm crying in the wilderness.
> 
> Thanksgiving all the same,
> 
> Bo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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/
>