[MD] The intellectual level - what is the end?

[David M]

Hi All

If the intellectual level at last came to fully master
the social level what difference would that make
to individuals and the society we live in?

David M

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <skutvik at online.no>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] The intellectual level - once more


> Ian, All
> 
> 23 Nov. you said:
> 
>> Bo it seems to me he's evading giving you the answer you want to hear,
>> but is patently clear that he does NOT intend the 4th / intellectual
>> level to be seen simply as SOM, not even historically.
> 
> THAT much I have figured out ;-).
> 
>> In fact he's confirming what several have been asserting on here ...
>> that SOM pervades the social level too.
> 
> Ditto!
> 
>> The fact he avoids giving (in that letter) any clearer indication of
>> what intellect actually is, suggests as DMB did recently that we
>> "know" the social / intellectual differences (pragmatically) but
>> really do not have any definitive distinction. (This is entirely
>> consistent with my own preferred view ... but that's another story.)
> 
> No level is defined, the first and second are self-evident. The 3rd. 
> may also look self-evident, but it has a MOQ particular MOQ 
> flavour and this flavour increases when it comes to the 4th. As 
> Pirsig says in the said letter: 
> 
>    "... but not intellectual in the MOQ sense"..   
> 
> In "Lila's Child" (p.64) he says: "
> 
>    In LILA I never defined the intellectual level since 
>    everyone who is up to reading LILA already knows what 
>    intellectual means."
> 
> But in the letter he refers to the early books of the Bible as 
> lacking intellectual value, thus reading books is no intellectual 
> criterion ..IN A MOQ SENSE!!! .. and this is plainly the S/O 
> SENSE!! Why did he not return Q-intellect its original and true 
> definition instead of ensnaring himself in the logical flaws of the 
> said letter?
> 
> I'm not exactly asking you Ian, just venting my frustration. You 
> once referred to "GOF SOM"  as the 4th. level. At first I thought 
> you thereby saw the 4th. level as the S/O distinction, but it was a 
> false hope. You still see SOM as just pervading intellect. WHAT 
> exactly does it pervade, without (in a P. fashion) answer 
> "intellect"? 
> 
> One more: The static levels are blind to the level context (not to 
> quality though) the Q context is only seen from MOQ's meta-
> level. The 4th. level by itself is SOM and its "intellect" is the 
> subject - the mind - that peers out at the  objective world. If this is 
> made into MOQ's 4th. level, it all turns haywire something that 
> has truly happened.       
> 
> 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/
>